Central  University  Library 

University  of  California,  San  Diego 
Please  Note:  This  item  is  subject  to  recall. 

Date  Due 


DEC  17 


Dtt  2  7  1993 


C/  39  (7/93) 


UCSD  Li). 


*" 


V 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA,  SAN  DIEG 


3  1822015262173 


Theories  of  Americanization 

A  Critical  Study 

With  Special  Reference  to  the  'Jewish  Group 


ISAAC  B.  BERKSON,  PH.D. 

Supervisor  of  Schools  and  Extension  Activities  of  the  Bureau  of 

Jewish  Education;  formerly  Executive  Director 

of  the  Central  Jewish  Institute 


Teachers  College,  Columbia  University 
Contributions  to  Education,  No.  109 


Published  by 

eiearltfra  (Eolbg?,  (Columbia  Umtreratty 

NEW  YORK  CITY 

1 920 


Copyright,  1920,  by  Isaac  B.  Berkson 


To  THE  MEMORY 

OF 
MY  TEACHER 

ISRAEL  FRIEDLAENDER 

INTERPRETER  BETWEEN  PAST  AND  PRESENT, 
EAST  AND  WEST,  ISRAEL  AND  AMERICA 


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

This  book  has  been  accepted  in  partial  fulfillment  of  the  require- 
ments for  the  degree  of  Doctor  of  Philosophy  under  the  Faculty  of 
Philosophy,  Columbia  University.  Such  acceptance,  it  is  under- 
stood, indicates  a  judgment  only  in  reference  to  quality  of  work;  it 
does  not  imply  that  the  views  expressed  are  sanctioned  by  the  Univer- 
sity authorities  or  by  the  members  of  the  committee  which  passed 
upon  the  dissertation.  For  the  point  of  view  presented,  the  writer 
must  bear  the  sole  responsibility. 

I  wish  to  acknowledge  my  indebtedness  and  to  express  my  sincere 
thanks  to  my  teachers  in  Columbia  University;  to  Professor  John 
Dewey,  whose  inspiration  and  encouragement  led  me  to  undertake  the 
writing;  to  Dr.  Isaac  L.  Kandel,  Associate  in  Education,  for  many 
valuable  suggestions;  and  especially  to  Dr.  William  H.  Kilpatrick, 
Professor  of  the  Philosophy  of  Education,  who  has  given  me  at  every 
point  painstaking,  constructive,  and  clarifying  criticism.  Of  my 
associates,  I  wish  to  thank  Dr.  A.  M.  Dushkin,  now  secretary  of  the 
Vaad  Hahinuch  in  Palestine,  and  Dr.  Julius  Drachsler,  Assistant 
Professor  of  Sociology  at  Smith  College,  for  what  I  learned  from  our 
many  discussions  as  well  as  for  their  criticism  of  various  parts  of  the 
study.  I  am  grateful  to  Mr.  Sol  Bluhm  for  giving  me  unstintingly  of 
his  time  in  the  revision  of  the  manuscript  and  in  the  reading  of  proof. 
There  are  many  other  friends  to  whom  thanks  are  due  for  helpful 
services. 

My  deepest  debt  of  gratitude  is  due  the  Bureau  of  Jewish  Educa- 
tion, brought  into  being  by  the  will  and  genius  of  its  director,  Dr. 
Samson  Benderly.  Ten  years  of  close  association  with  him  and  this 
work  have  given  me  an  unexampled  opportunity  to  gain  an  insight 
into  Jewish  affairs,  a  sense  of  discipline  in  organization,  a  technique  in 
practical  work.  Most  of  all,  through  the  Bureau  of  Jewish  Education 
I  have  had  the  rare  and  profound  experience  of  conversation  and 
comradeship  with  a  group  of  men  and  women,  teachers  and  co-work- 
ers, devoted  through  many  trials,  with  single-mindedness  and  purity 
of  purpose,  to  the  practical  realization  of  a  spiritual  ideal. 

ISAAC  B.  BEHKSON 
October,  1920 


CONTENTS 

PART  I 

INTRODUCTORY  . 


I.    THE  DOCTRINES  OF  DEMOCRACY 9 

1.  The  Scope  of  Democracy;  2.  The  Basis  of  Democracy; 
3.  The  Quintessence  of  Democracy;  4.  The  Criteria  of 
Democracy;  5.  Democracy  and  Minorities. 

II.    THEORIES  OF  ETHNIC  ADJUSTMENT 49 

1.  The  Jews — A  Minority  Ethnic  Community;  2.  The 
'Americanization'  Theory;  3.  Americanization  as  Like- 
mindedness;  4.  The 'Melting  Pot' Theory;  5.  The 'Feder- 
ation of  Nationalities'  Theory. 

III.  THE  'COMMUNITY'  THEORY 97 

1.  The  Cultural  Basis  of  the  'Community'  Theory;  2.  Its 
Relation  to  the  Family;  3.  Its  Relation  to  Zionism;  4. 
Variability  in  Retention  of  the  Ethnic  Heritage. 

IV.  THE  VALUE  OF  ETHNIC  GROUPS 121 

1.  The  Basis  of  Evaluation;  2.  Sincerity  of  Outlook;  3. 
Loyalty  to  a  Minority;  4.  Multiple  Culture  Loyalty; 
5.  The  Hebrew  Language  and  Literature;  6.  Jewish  His- 
tory; 7.  The  Jewish  People — An  Internation. 


PART  II 

V.    THE  RELATION  OF  ETHNIC  AND  CHURCH  SCHOOLS  TO  THE 

STATE 147 

1.  Sect  and  Ethnos;  2.  The  Parochial  School;  3.  Re- 
ligious Instruction  in  the  State  Schools;  4.  Supplementary 
Ethnic  and  Religious  Schools. 


VIH  THEORIES    OF   AMERICANIZATION 

VI.    THE  CENTRAL  JEWISH  INSTITUTE — A  JEWISH  COMMUNITY 

CENTER   177 

1.  Its  Significance  as  an  Agency  of  Ethnic  Adjustment; 

2.  Neighborhood  and  History;   3.  The  Building;   4.  Con- 
trol and  Administration;  5.  The  Plan  of  Work  (a)  Talmud 
Torah;    (6)  Jewish  Extension  Work;    (c)  Social,  Civic  and 
General  Activities. 

SELECTED  REFERENCES  .  .   225 


INTRODUCTORY 

The  problem  of  proper  adjustment  of  the  foreign  ethnic  groups 
in  our  midst  to  the  life  of  America — popularly  termed  "Americaniza- 
tion"— was  a  subject  of  great  interest  even  before  the  War.  Now,  in 
the  aftermath,  a  heightened  national  consciousness  has  made  of  this 
question  one  of  those  burning  issues  which  it  is  difficult,  nay  im- 
possible, to  discuss  without  stirring  deep  prejudices.  Patriotism 
intensified  by  the  experience  of  war  immediately  conjures  up  the 
spectre  of  foreign  intrigue  whenever  the  subject  of  the  unassimilated 
immigrant  is  broached.  In  addition,  the  problem  has  become 
associated  in  men's  minds  with  the  whole  discussion  of  internal 
political  and  industrial  reorganization  which  seems  to  many  to 
threaten  the  stability  of  present  forms  of  government.  Closely 
linked  with  the  fear  of  foreign  enemies  and  with  the  apprehension  of 
"Bolshevistic"  revolution,  it  is  small  wonder  that  much  of  what  is 
said  nowadays  concerning  "Americanization"  savors  of  hysteria. 

It  may  be  urged  that  in  such  critical  times  as  these  only  drastic 
measures  are  expedient.  Our  own  recent  experiences  in  the  war, 
however,  have  sufficiently  demonstrated  that  even  in  those  moments 
when  the  need  for  action  seems  most  urgent  a  decision  which  reckons 
with  the  fundamental  principles  involved  serves  not  only  justice 
and  the  right,  but  also  in  the  end  the  practical.  The  war  was  won 
only  because  men  had  come  to  believe  that  they  were  fighting  for  a 
basic  principle — for  democracy.1  A  careful  analysis  with  reference 
to  fundamental  principles  becomes  all  the  more  necessary  because  our 
problem  is  a  pressing  one.  What  are  the  implications  of  democracy 
for  the  relations  of  foreign  ethnic  groups  to  the  state?  This  question 
requires  clear  thinking,  because  we  should  seek  to  be  true  to  the 
fundamental  concept  of  American  thought;  the  correct  answer  will 
avert  failure  in  the  practical  task  confronting  us. 

This  book  attempts  a  critical  study  of  our  question  with  special 
reference  to  the  problem  of  the  Jewish  group.  What  place  has  the 

likewise,  if  in  the  end  the  hope  for  a  lasting  peace  shall  prove  to  have  been  empty, 
it  will  be  because  the  fundamental  principles,  the  proclamation  of  which  had  won  the 
war,  were  forgotten  in  the  final  settlement. 


2  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

Jewish  group  in  our  democracy?  May  it  retain  its  identity  or  must  it 
fuse  entirely  with  the  total  group?  Second,  if  it  may  retain  its  identity, 
under  what  limitations  and  through  what  agencies  may  it  do  so?  These 
are  the  questions  which  must  concern  us  in  any  consideration  of  the 
problem  of  the  relationship  of  ethnic  groups  to  the  state.  While, 
therefore,  our  specific  interest  is  the  Jewish  group,  the  whole  discus- 
sion is  in  the  main  applicable — with  the  proper  qualifications — to 
other  ethnic  groups.  Especially  will  this  be  true  because  the  dis- 
cussion here  deals  mainly  with  the  general  principles  which  should 
govern  the  relationship,  not  with  the  description  of  the  actual  pro- 
cesses of  assimilation  taking  place  in  this  particular  group.  The  fact 
that  the  Jews  are  not  only  an  ethnic  group,  but  also  a  cultural  and 
religious  community,  enhances  the  appropriateness  of  using  it  in 
our  discussion  to  elucidate  the  general  problem.  For  this  very 
reason  the  Jews,  as  the  following  pages  will  make  clear,  present  a 
crucial  case  where  the  significant  elements  are  thrown  into  distinct 
relief. 

Perhaps  it  is  not  superfluous  to  state  plainly  that  the  conclusions 
offered  in  reference  to  the  Jewish  group  are  in  the  main  precedent  to 
the  argument  presented  here.  No  pretense  is  made  that  they  are 
the  result  of  theoretical  analysis  alone.  This  discussion  is  a  rationali- 
zation of  a  point  of  view  derived  from  the  writer's  personal  history 
and  experiences  and  confirmed  by  subsequent  study  and  speculation. 
It  represents  an  attempt  to  clarify,  to  make  explicit,  and  to  intro- 
duce the  balance  of  reason  into  a  conviction  which  has  been  many 
years  in  the  forming,  rather  than  an  effort  to  contrive  a  conclusion 
out  of  the  objective  study  of  abstract  premises. 

The  whole  argument  rests  upon  the  assumption  that  the  United 
States  aims  to  be  a  democracy.  The  discussion  may  be  conceived 
as  an  explication  of  the  significances  inherent  in  that  term  for  the 
relations  of  ethnic  groups  to  the  state  in  the  conditions  prevailing 
in  the  United  States.  Since  the  word  'democracy'  has  come  to  be 
used  as  a  general  term  of  approval  and  each  man  tends  to  see  in  it 
his  own  ideal,  it  will  be  necessary  first  to  give  some  notion  of  what 
the  writer  implies  in  the  assumption.  The  first  chapter,  then,  will 
deal  with  an  analysis  of  the  basic  concept,  democracy.  After  this 


INTRODUCTORY  3 

orientation  the  following  chapters  will  consider  the  various  types  of 
ethnic  relationship  possible,  reviewing  them  with  the  fundamental 
notion  in  mind  and  developing  finally  that  plan  which  seems  to 
harmonize  best  with  the  basic  concept.  The  concluding  chapters 
will  deal  with  the  implications  of  the  proposed  method  of  adjustment 
for  the  educational  situation.  There  is  added  a  chapter  on  the  Cen- 
tral Jewish  Institute,  an  institution  which  will  serve  as  a  basis  of 
discussion  for  the  type  of  educational  agency  conceived  as  adequate 
and  proper  in  a  democracy  for  the  solution  of  our  problem.  The 
description  of  this  institution  will  furnish  a  concrete  illustration  of 
the  implication  of  the  theory  projected  and  will  serve  as  a  check  upon 
the  meaning  of  the  more  abstract  discussion. 

The  discussion,  then,  while  setting  out  to  consider  the  question 
before  us  from  the  point  of  view  of  principles  involved  rather  than 
from  the  point  of  view  of  expediency  or  the  seeming  immediate  need, 
nevertheless  at  no  point  leaves  out  of  consideration  the  actual  situa- 
tion and  offers  an  opportunity  for  comparison  of  the  moral  conclusion 
with  the  practical  feasibility. 


PART  I 

I    THE  DOCTRINES  OF  DEMOCRACY 
II    THEORIES  OF  ETHNIC  ADJUSTMENT 

III  THE  'COMMUNITY'  THEORY 

IV  THE  VALUE  OF  ETHNIC  GROUPS 


THE  DOCTRINES  OF  DEMOCRACY 


/  refer  to  a  Democracy  thai  is  yet  unborn. 

— WALT  WHITMAN. 


CHAPTER  I 
THE  DOCTRINES  OF  DEMOCRACY 

I 

THE  SCOPE  OF  DEMOCRACY 

Democracy  has  become  much  like  an  established  religion;  every- 
one avows  it  and  untold  sacrifices  are  brought  in  its  name,  yet  few 
seem  to  have  any  clear  idea  of  its  profound  meaning.  Such  is  the 
complaint  that  is  frequently  met  nowadays  in  the  numerous  articles 
which  attempt  to  present  to  us  a  more  adequate  conception  of  the 
fundamental  principle  assumed  to  underlie  our  civilization.  In 
one  form  or  another  we  find  reiterated,  "We  have  repeatedly  pro- 
fessed this  creed  on  many  solemn  and  public  occasions.  Do  we  really 
mean  it?  And  if  so,  what  do  we  mean  by  it?"1 

To  most  minds  the  term  still  brings  primarily  political  connota- 
tions, and  such  a  limitation  of  usage  is  supported  by  much  more  than 
mere  philological  derivation.  The  tendency  to  identify  democracy 
with  a  method  of  political  organization  has  its  justification  in  the 
prime  importance  that  government  has  for  life.2  Where  one  may 
dwell,  how  one  is  to  earn  a  living,  what  a  person  can  know  and 
believe — all  of  these  practical  questions  are  affected  by  the  systems 
which  the  state  permits  and  supports.  Political  organization  rather 
than  prayer,  we  might  even  say,  determines  our  salvation  in  any 
real  sense  of  the  word.  Undoubtedly  it  is  the  recognition  of  the 
controlling  importance  of  politics  that  has  led  in  modern  times  to  the 
ascendancy  of  the  State  above  the  Church. 

The  history  of  the  United  States  as  an  experiment  in  democracy 
adds  much  force  to  this  emphasis  on  the  political  aspect  of  our  life. 
Undoubtedly  the  democratic  ideal  has  indirectly  been  a  factor  in  the 
shaping  of  many  phases  of  our  social  life,  in  the  development  of 

1Ralph  Barton  Perry,  "What  Do  We  Mean  by  Democracy?"  International 
Journal  of  Ethics,  July,  1918. 

2Cf.  Ogg  and  Beard,  National  Government  and  the  World  War,  preface. 


10  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

education,  in  the  adjustment  of  racial  and  class  differences,  and  even 
to  some  extent  in  the  reorganization  of  industry.  The  main  and 
direct  applications,  however,  have  so  far  been  governmental,  and  this 
tendency  in  the  course  of  our  history  has  stamped  itself  upon  the 
meaning  that  the  word  'democracy'  carries  to  the  average  American. 

The  emphasis  upon  the  political  connotation  is  well  brought  out 
if  we  compare  the  Declaration  of  Independence  with  the  subsequent 
great  documents  of  American  history.  From  the  Constitution  on, 
so  a  leading  American  thinker1  points  out,  the  epoch  making  docu- 
ments of  American  life  reveal  a  constantly  widening  application  of 
the  concept  of  democracy.  The  preamble  is  inspired  with  the  desire 
of  securing  the  blessings  of  liberty  for  ourselves  and  our  posterity.  In 
the  Monroe  Doctrine  the  boundaries  of  our  homeland  have  been 
surpassed  and  the  European  countries  are  warned  that  these  hemi- 
spheres must  remain  inviolate.  The  Civil  War  extended  the  idea  of 
freedom  racially,  proclaiming  that  the  nation  cannot  remain  half  slave 
and  half  free.  Our  entrance  into  the  European  War  was  justified  by 
an  international  aim  that  the  world  be  made  safe  for  Democracy.  As 
Alexander  says,  "The  World:  Here,  indeed  is  expansion;  our  globe 
has  shrunk  too  small  for  democratic  and  autocratic  states  to  sub- 
sist together,  nor  can  Ocean  herself  constrain  them  in  separation. 
Democracy  has  issued  her  final  defiance  to  all  the  citadels  of  absolu- 
tism, proclaiming  no  longer  her  right  to  independences,  nor  merely 
her  right  to  her  own  free  field,  but  now  her  purposed  supremacy  in 
all  fields  and  over  all  polities.  Here  is  arrogance  of  pretension  out- 
matching Monroe's,  whose  broad-limned  compromise  breaks  futile, 
like  the  old  compromises  of  North  and  South.  Democracy  claims 
for  itself  no  less  thing  than  the  world." 

The  full  significance  of  the  new  epoch,  however,  resides  not  alone 
in  the  expansion  of  the  concept  to  an  international  application.  If 
we  examine  the  Declaration  of  Independence  we  find  there  the  idea 
of  democracy  already  expressed  in  universal  terms:  "All  men  are 
born  free  and  equal  and  endowed  by  their  Creator  with  certain 
unalienable  rights."  Indeed,  the  thought  transcends  even  inter- 
national implication  and  rises  to  cosmic  and  religious  terminology. 

'Hartley  B.  Alexander,  essay  "Americanism"  in  Liberty  and  Democracy,  p.  131. 


THE   DOCTRINES   OF   DEMOCRACY  11 

The  aspiration  for  humanity's  welfare  is  not  new;  it  was  the  subject 
of  the  burning  message  of  the  Prophets  of  ancient  Israel  and  the 
inspiration  of  the  cosmopolitans  of  the  eighteenth  century.  All 
great  religions  have  expressed  the  longing  for  a  universal  good. 
The  present  epoch  is  particularly  important  not  because  for  the  first 
time  we  meet  an  aspiration  in  international  terms,  but  because  a 
tremendous  effort  is  being  made  to  create  the  political  institution 
which  will  make  possible  a  realization  of  the  age-long  dream.  Ameri- 
can history  is  to  be  seen  not  as  a  struggle  for  the  development  of  the 
idea  of  freedom  but  as  an  experiment  with  the  political  institutions 
that  shall  guarantee  freedom.  The  entire  significance  of  the  recent 
struggle  is  lost  if  the  emphasis  is  placed  anywhere  else  than  on  the 
international  governmental  institution  which  must  be  created  in 
order  to  convert  the  desire  into  a  reality.  The  important  distinction 
between  a  longing  and  a  political  guarantee  is  clearly  felt  and  finds 
expression  in  the  explanatory  phrase  following  President  Wilson's 
famous  pronouncement:  "The  World  must  be  made  safe  for  democ- 
racy: its  peace  must  be  planted  upon  tested  foundations  of  political 
liberty." 

Democracy  must  be  embodied  in  political  institutions;  that  is 
the  conviction  that  has  animated  American  history.  Many  recent 
writers,1  however,  while  agreeing  heartily  with  the  importance  of  the 
political  phase  tend  to  feel  that  it  is  a  grave  error  to  identify  democracy 
with  principles  of  government  exclusively.  It  is  pointed  out  that 
political  democracy  cannot  be  an  end  in  itself;  it  is  a  means  of  gaining 
human  freedom.  There  are  instances  where  the  end  can  be  reached 
more  directly  through  reform  in  the  industrial  or  educational  field 
than  through  the  agency  of  the  ballot  and  political  methods.  Fur- 
thermore, conditions  of  education,  of  economic  organization,  of  social 
prejudice,  so  affect  politics  that  even  political  democracy  becomes 
unattainable,  if  political  democracy  alone  engages  our  attention. 
To  limit  the  definition  to  political  reform  without  realizing  the  in- 

TOobhouse,  Liberalism,  see  especially  Chaps.  II,  VIII,  IX;  Herbert  Croly,  Pro- 
gressive Democracy;  Walter  Weyl,  The  New  Democracy;  Alfred  Zimmern,  The  War  and 
Democracy,  Chap.  I;  Dewey,  Democracy  and  Education;  Jane  Addams,  Democracy 
and  Social  Ethics;  Giddings,  Democracy  and  Empire;  MacVannel,  Outlines  of  Philoso- 
phy of  Education,  Chap.  IX. 


12  THEORIES   OF  AMERICANIZATION 

fluence  of  other  phases  of  life  is  often  to  block  the  development  of 
democracy. 

Not  alone  theories,  events,  too,  urge  upon  us  new  implications 
beyond  the  political.  With  the  Russian  attempt  at  control  of 
industry  by  the  workers  already  in  the  process  of  experimentation 
and  with  an  industrial  unrest  of  unprecedented  extent  and  turbulence 
threatening  the  present  capitalistic  order  it  seems  necessary  certainly 
to  consider  immediately  the  extension  of  our  concept  to  the  field  of 
industry.  Beyond  this,  still  in  the  realm  of  the  vague  unconscious 
begins  to  loom  the  problem  of  the  reorganization  of  our  educational 
system,  implying  radical  changes  in  fundamental  conceptions, 
philosophy,  aims,  methods  and  agencies  far  surpassing  mere  pedagogi- 
cal improvements.  Still  there  are  some  who  maintain  that  we  cannot 
speak  of  Industrial  or  Social  Democracy,  or  of  Democracy  in  the 
abstract,  because  we  do  not  yet  have  actual  examples  of  what  these 
signify,  and  it  is  therefore  impossible  to  know  them.  Such  'practical' 
minds  refuse  to  recognize  anything  as  existing  unless  a  precedent 
can  be  found  in  application.  It  must  be  remembered,  however,  that 
the  accomplishments  of  democracy  in  the  political  field  did  not  wait 
for  precedents.  Must  not  the  application  to  other  phases  of  life 
be  made  with  the  same  bold  hazard  (in  thought  and  act)  that  carried 
through  the  experiment  in  the  political  field?  We  have  certainly 
gone  far  beyond  the  primary  meaning  of  the  word  'democracy'  and 
conceive  its  political  implications  as  manifestations  of  an  underlying 
and  far-reaching  principle  full  of  significance  for  industry,  education 
and  the  many  other  phases  of  social  life.1 

Indeed,  democracy  is  so  touched  with  deep  emotion  that  even 
this  broad  definition  in  terms  of  a  general  principle  applicable  to 
all  social  institutions  seems  inadequate  to  express  the  fulness  of 
its  meaning.  We  feel  somehow  that  our  ideal  cannot  be  attained  by 
reorganization  of  institutions  alone, — our  most  hidden  and  intimate 
conversations  and  our  casual  actions  and  relationships  must  be 
pervaded  by  a  democratic  spirit.  It  is  the  creation  of  a  type  of 
personality  that  the  democratic  ideal  envisages.  Democracy  is  not 

'Charles  A.  Elwood,  "Democracy  and  Social  Conditions  in  the  United  States," 
International  Journal  of  Ethics,  July,  1918. 


THE   DOCTRINES   OF  DEMOCRACY  18 

only  something  political  and  institutional;  its  real  essence  is  spiritual. 
Definitions  in  terms  of  a  rule,  of  a  principle,  or  even  of  a  philosophy 
are  too  pale,  too  platonic,  too  formal,  too  balanced,  too  finite  in 
meaning  and  in  application,  too  static.  The  forces  of  democracy 
seem  to  rest  in  the  unfathomed  depths  of  human  and  world  nature; 
there  is  something  elemental  in  the  term.  It  reaches  upward,  too, 
towards  unattained  heights  of  the  spirit;  it  is  essentially  an  urge — 
a  dynamic  force  in  life.1 

Democracy  is  a  religious  aspiration  as  well  as  a  form  of  social 
organization.  Only  by  realizing  what  is  implied  in  its  final  goal  can 
we  judge  whether  any  particular  embodiment  leads  in  the  right 
direction.  However  efficient  our  organization  may  seem  to  the  mind 
that  loves  perfected  form  and  judges  by  accepted  standards,  any 
activity  must  prove  meaningless  unless  it  serves  the  ultimate  ideal. 
"To  what  purpose  is  the  multitude  of  your  sacrifices  unto  Me? 
Who  hath  required  this  at  your  hand,  to  trample  My  courts?  In- 
cense is  an  abomination  unto  Me;  new  moon  and  Sabbath,  the  call- 
ing of  assemblies.  .  .  .  Cease  to  do  evil :  learn  to  do  well."  Thus 
cries  the  prophet  divining  that  there  is  no  service  of  God  in  the  per- 
formance without  the  spirit,  in  the  activity  unrelated  to  the  abiding 
aim.  What  is  the  essence  of  the  striving  we  call  democratic  and 
what  are  the  conditions  sine  qua  non  of  its  fulfillment?  The  answers 
to  this  catechism  will  yield  us  what  may  be  called  the  Doctrines  of 
Democracy,  the  inviolable  assumptions  which  must  guide  us  in  any 
subsequent  discussion. 

Often  the  attempt  is  made  to  define  Democracy  in  terms  of  older 
ideals,  such  as  equality,  liberty  or  justice,  etc.,  leaving  the  impression 
that  the  new  term  is  little  more  than  a  new  name  for  old  aspirations. 
Such  a  procedure  misses  the  point  entirely.  Undoubtedly  old  ideas 
and  aspirations  as  well  as  older  religions  have  contributed  to  the  idea 
of  Democracy.  But  the  essential  point  to  emphasize  is  that  Democ- 
racy is  a  new  synthesis,  a  new  outlook  and  evaluation.  To  translate 
it  into  the  older  terminology  robs  the  new  concept  of  its  unique 
character,  of  its  specific  connotations  and  associations,  of  its  own 

JWalt  "Whitman,  Democratic  Vistas;  Edward  Carpenter,  Towards  Democracy;  Oscar 
L.  Triggs,  Browning  and  Whitman,  A  Study  in  Democracy;  A.  G.  Flack,  Democracy. 


14  THEORIES   OF  AMERICANIZATION 

emotional  driving  power.  A  more  direct  examination  into  its 
meaning  without  recourse  to  the  aid  of  the  mediating  agency  of  the 
familiar  spirits,  liberty  and  equality,  is  less  likely  to  divest  the  new 
idea  of  its  specific  implications.  Moreover,  the  error  will  be  avoided 
of  identifying  democracy  with  a  meaning  derived  not  from  itself  but 
from  one  of  its  extensions,  as  is  often  done,  for  instance,  when  we  con- 
fuse it  with  egalitarianism  (from  equality)  or  with  laissez  faire  and 
individualism  (from  liberty).  What  we  need  to  hold  clearly  in  mind 
is  the  particular  emphasis,  the  essential  significance  of  the  new  ideal . 

II 
THE  BASIS  OF  DEMOCRACY 

The  analysis  presented  below  follows  a  hint  offered  by  Professor 
Dewey  in  his  suggestion  that  "Democracy,  the  crucial  expression 
of  modern  life,  is  not  so  much  an  addition  to  the  scientific  and  in- 
dustrial tendencies,  as  it  is  the  perception  of  their  social  or  spiritual 
meaning."1  What  the  modern  development  has  told  us  of  the  way  of 
life — our  new  experiences,  knowledges,  and  ideas  unified  into  a  prin- 
ciple— that  is  democracy. 

Development  in  methods  of  human  communication  and  of  diffusion 
of  knowledge,  the  discovery  of  the  potentialities  of  steam  and  electric- 
ity, the  opening  up  of  America,  mechanical  inventions,  expansion 
of  industry,  progress  in  popular  control  of  government,  accumulation 
of  bodies  of  scientific  fact,  all  these  have  contributed  to  make  what 
we  call  modern  times.  But  more  than  all  of  these  many  inventions 
is  the  formulation  of  the  Doctrine  of  Evolution.  Through  it  a  change 
of  mental  attitude  has  come  about;  all  our  thinking  has  been  shot 
through  with  an  idea  of  movement,  development,  growth.  Our 
sciences  of  man,  and  the  expression  of  our  ideals  of  man,  our  psy- 
chology, sociology,  anthropology,  philosophy,  ethics  are  undergoing 
a  transformation  under  the  influence  of  this  powerful  ferment.  It 
is  this  idea  ultimately  which  divides  the  mediaeval  from  the  mod- 
ern, the  platonic  from  the  pragmatic,  and  dissolves  the  dualism  of  the 
Christian  scheme  of  morality  into  the  unity  of  the  physical  and  the 

^'Intelligence  and  Morals"  in  The  Influence  of  Darwin  on  Philosophy,  p.  59. 


THE   DOCTRINES   OF   DEMOCRACY  15 

spiritual  demanded  by  the  democratic  ideal.  What  democracy  is 
can  be  understood  only  when  we  recall  what  is  fundamental  in  the 
modern  situation,  when  we  consider  the  influence  exerted  by  the 
theory  of  evolution  on  modern  thought. 

Whatever  may  justly  be  said  concerning  the  insufficiency  of  the 
Doctrine  of  Evolution  as  an  ultimate  explanation  of  the  genesis  and 
development  of  the  world  we  cannot  pretend,  as  the  obscurantists  do, 
that  since  the  Biblical  and  the  scientific  accounts  are  both  inade- 
quate, it  is  immaterial  which  one  of  these  we  accept.  The  modern 
theory,  it  must  be  conceded,  has  wrought  a  fundamental  change  in 
our  mental  attitude.  Previously  accepted  attempts  at  explanation 
had  ended  with  the  assumption  of  a  preexisting  conscious  creator, 
who  had  created  and  who  ruled  the  world  in  accordance  with  some 
divine  plan.  One  idea  was  dominant  in  the  minds  of  laymen  and 
priests,  of  the  masses  and  the  scholars :  namely,  that  a  definite  plan 
preexisted  creation,  that  some  divine  purpose  was  to  be  fulfilled 
through  living.  Milton  at  the  end  of  the  Middle  Ages  gives  us  a 
classic  description  of  this  planned  and  delimited  universe. 

He  took  the  golden  compasses,  prepared 

In  God's  eternal  store,  to  circumscribe 

This  Universe,  and  all  created  things. 

One  foot  He  centered  and  the  other  turned 

Round  thru  the  vast  profundity  obscure, 

And  said,  "Thus  far  extend,  thus  far  thy  bounds, 

This  be  thy  just  circumference,  O  world!" 

Men  seeing  apparent  artifice  and  order  in  the  world  easily  jump 
to  the  conclusion  that  these  had  been  planned.  The  rabbinic  legend 
taking  advantage  of  this  natural  tendency  presents  the  argument 
for  design  in  a  simple  and  telling  form.  "There  is  a  story  of  a  sceptic 
who  came  and  said  to  Rabbi  Akibah,  'Who  created  this  Universe?' 
Said  the  latter,  'The  Holy  One,  Blessed  be  He.'  Trove  it  to  me,' 
said  the  sceptic.  He  was  told  to  come  the  next  day.  When  he 
presented  himself  on  the  morrow,  Rabbi  Akibah  asked,  'What  are 
you  wearing?'  'A  cloak,'  he  said.  'Who  made  it?'  'The  Weaver.' 
'I  don't  believe  you;  prove  it  to  me,'  said  the  Rabbi.  'Why  should 
I  prove  it  to  you,  don't  you  know  that  the  weaver  made  it?'  'And 


16  THEORIES   OF  AMERICANIZATION 

you,  don't  you  know  that  the  Holy  One,  Blessed  be  He,  created  His 
Universe,'  responded  the  Rabbi.  The  sceptic  went  off.  And  the 
pupils  (of  Rabbi  Akibah)  asked,  'Where  is  the  proof?'  So  he  said, 
'My  children,  just  as  the  house  implies  a  builder,  the  cloak  a  weaver 
and  the  door  a  carpenter,  so  does  the  Universe  imply  the  Holy  One 
Blessed  be  He,  who  created  it.'" 

The  sceptic,  as  the  story  tells,  goes  off,  though  we  may  suspect 
that  he  remains  unconvinced.  Obviously,  the  students  who  should 
understand  their  teacher  are  not  persuaded  at  first.  Perhaps  the 
difficulty  all  along  has  been  that  those  dissatisfied  with  the  old 
explanation  had  no  other  to  offer  in  reply.  What  the  theory  of  evolu- 
tion has  done  is  to  propose  a  constructive  suggestion  concerning  the 
genesis  and  development  of  our  world,  so  that  the  sceptic  need  no 
longer  be  silenced  for  want  of  an  answer.  The  new  theory  submits 
evidence  that  this  wonderful  scheme  of  things  which  seems  to  hang 
together  so  beautifully  could  have  come  into  being  without  having 
been  planned  beforehand.  It  is  now  clearly  realized  that  since  the 
world  is  here,  it  had  to  arise  in  some  manner;  and  that  any  process  of 
events  would  seem,  after  the  fact,  as  if  it  had  been  purposely  planned 
to  bring  about  what  really  had  been  the  result  of  mere  happening, 
if  the  process  had  at  the  same  time  chanced  to  culminate  in  a  being 
like  man  who  could  look  over  and  think  about  the  course  of  develop- 
ment.1 The  conflict  between  Religion  and  Science  has  ended,  with 
reference  to  the  question  of  cosmogenesis,  with  such  a  complete 
victory  for  the  latter  that  no  thinker  would  to-day  seriously  suggest 
the  simple  assumption  so  universally  accepted  in  former  times. 

Hand  in  hand  with  this  dialectical  dethronement  of  the  King  of 
Kings  has  gone  an  inevitable  revolution  in  thought  far  more  impor- 
tant than  the  irreverence  of  Use  majestt.  Ideas  of  chance  variation, 
of  selection  and  survival  by  adaptation  to  circumstance  have  entered 
where  before  Immutable  Purpose  perfect  and  complete  from  the 
very  beginning  reigned  supreme.  Not  only  has  the  theory  of  evolu- 
tion brought  the  notion  of  change  and  development  into  the  explana- 
tion of  forms  and  species;  its  contagion  has  spread  and  affected  the 
conception  of  Truth,  of  Purpose,  and  of  the  meaning  of  the  Universe. 

JWilliam  James,  Pragmatism,  Chap.  Ill,  pp.  113-14. 


THE   DOCTRINES   OF   DEMOCRACY  17 

These,  also,  if  the  Doctrine  of  Evolution  be  sincerely  held  and  con- 
sistently applied  are  seen  to  be  in  the  process  of  slow  development 
with  no  "fixed  first  or  final  causes."1  With  this  introduction  of 
relativity  into  the  sphere  of  philosophy  the  fundamental  notion  of 
value  cannot  escape  restatement.  Among  the  absolutes  that  have 
been  banished  is  also  the  conception  of  absolute  values. 

The  term  'value'  is  in  itself  a  relative  term  and  can  have  meaning 
only  in  reference  to  some  definite  point  of  view.  What  could  we 
possibly  mean  by  a  good  which  could  not  be  related  finally  to  an 
existence  for  which  it  was  considered  beneficial?  With  Socrates  we 
must  agree  that  goods  which  are  'just  good'  and  not  good  for  anything 
in  particular  must  be  good  for  nothing.  But  a  value  may  become  an 
'absolute'  by  being  related  to  an  existence  whose  good  is  in  itself 
considered  absolute.  By  serving  a  Being  or  Purpose  or  Good  as- 
sumed to  be  absolute  the  ministering  value  too  becomes  absolute. 

As  long  as  there  existed  in  men's  minds  an  overshadowing  idea  of  a 
Transcendental  Master  of  the  Universe  it  was  easy  to  insist  on 
absolute  values  without  disturbing  the  logical  sense.  Some  sceptic 
now  and  then  may  have  questioned  the  basic  assumption,  but  the 
prevailing  notion  not  only  of  the  masses,  but  of  scholars,  writers  and 
teachers  was  permeated  with  the  predominating  conception.  Ac- 
cordingly when  value  or  purpose  or  truth  were  spoken  of,  the  mind 
did  not  immediately  fly  to  the  necessary  logical  question,  whose  or 
what  value,  purpose  or  truth;  for  it  was  tacitly  understood  that  all 
realities  were  to  be  referred  to  God.  So  deeply  embedded  in  the 
social  psychology  was  the  assumption  of  a  conscious  creator  that  the 
failure  to  mention  the  point  of  reference  raised  no  problem  at  all;  just 
as  the  omission  of  the  word  'air'  after  'to  breathe'  would  disturb  no 
one  to-day.  It  was  possible  under  the  ruling  conception  of  an 
Omniscient  Creator  to  give  to  men's  desires,  aspirations,  beliefs, 
laws  and  values,  an  eternal  and  absolute  significance  by  ascribing 
their  origin  to  the  Almighty.  Any  interest,  whether  it  had  resulted 
from  social  experience  and  traditional  practice  or  represented  the 
desires  of  the  powerful,  received  the  sanction  of  a  sacred  value, 
if  it  could  in  some  way  be  established  that  it  had  its  origin  in  a  revela- 

*Dewey,  The  Influence  of  Darwin  on  Philosophy,  Chap.  I. 


18  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

tion  from  the  deity.  Indeed,  carrying  this  doctrine  to  its  logical 
conclusion  (which  Samuel  Butler  tells  us  is  very  bad  for  any  doctrine) 
nothing  had  value  except  as  it  was  from  God  and  in  the  degree  that 
it  served  ad  maiorem  dei  gloriam.  "Man  was  swallowed  up  in  the 
plan  of  God." 

So  when  the  Doctrine  of  Evolution  spread,  not  only  among  the 
few  philosophical,  but  to  the  more  influential  class  of  writers,  poets, 
teachers  and  students,  undermining  the  accepted  assumption  of  a 
conscious  creator,  the  whole  system  of  absolute  values  and  the  notion 
of  a  teleological  plan  of  the  universe  lost  the  powerful  support  of  the 
established  order.  The  transcendental  sanction  upon  which  it  had 
been  possible  to  rest  the  whole  scheme  of  traditional  values  had  to 
be  given  up  and  the  logic  of  authoritarianism  was  called  into  question. 
Just  that  problem  which  had  sunk  into  the  level  of  unconsciousness 
under  the  anaesthetic  influence  of  placid  belief  in  God  was  roused  by 
the  new  dynamic  theory.  From  what  point  of  view  shall  value 
be  reckoned?  The  notions  of  change  and  development  in  our  mod- 
ern point  of  view  make  it  so  evident  that  there  can  be  many  worlds 
to  which  our  ideas  of  value  may  be  related.  The  significant  effect 
of  the  Doctrine  of  Evolution  on  the  world  of  thought  is  its  destruction  of 
the  possibility  of  maintaining  with  equanimity  the  conception  of  absolute 
values  and  purposes.1  We  are  harassed  when  we  mention  the  word 
'value'  by  the  obligation  of  telling  also  the  position  from  which  we 
speak. 

If  we  can  no  longer  refer  our  values  to  a  conceptual  deity,  has  the 
Doctrine  of  Evolution  given  any  other  large  impelling  idea  to  guide 
the  labors  of  men?  Has  it  proposed  any  constructive  notion  which 
might  serve  as  a  criterion  by  which  to  judge  'the  good'?  One  might 
be  prompted  to  respond  that  in  the  idea  of  the  "survival  of  the  fit- 
test" some  standard  might  be  found,  but  it  is  clear  on  second  thought 

1It  is  not  the  aim  in  these  few  paragraphs  to  prove  the  position  of  the  relativists  as 
against  the  absolutists.  The  writer  assumes  the  relativist  attitude  as  the  only  defensi- 
ble position.  All  that  is  meant  to  be  said  above  is  that  value  assumed  as  absolute 
was  a  currency  which  would  pass  unquestioned  formerly  because  it  had  the  stamp 
of  the  established  realm  of  theological  thought,  but  that  now  with  the  overthrow  of 
that  regnant  position,  the  coin  will  not  pass — each  one  tends  to  ring  it  and  to  examine  it 
with  great  care.  It  no  longer  serves  adequately  as  a  means  for  facilitating  action  and 
life's  processes.  It  is,  as  James  would  say,  a  "dead  hypothesis." 


THE   DOCTRINES   OF   DEMOCRACY  19 

that  the  word  "fittest"  adds  nothing  to  the  idea  of  "survival." 
Whatever  survives,  that  is  the  "fittest."  Both  very  complex  organ- 
isms sensitive  to  a  variety  of  stimuli  and  simple  inanimate  substances 
are  in  the  category  of  the  "fittest"  since  both  persist  and  have  become 
"adjusted  to  the  environment."  A  diamond  maintaining  the  identity 
of  form  and  substance  even  after  the  earth  had  cooled  might  be 
looked  upon  as  more  fit  than  a  highly  complex  animal  organism 
which  needs  a  complex  environment  for  its  perpetuation.  Evidently 
whether  an  organism  is  fit  depends  upon  what  its  environment  is, 
which  in  turn  depends  upon  its  own  capability  to  react,  which  is  indeed 
another  way  of  describing  the  characteristics  of  the  organism.  The 
two  relations  are  completely  reciprocal.  Everything  that  we  find 
in  the  world  must  from  such  a  point  of  view  be  considered  equally  fit.1 

The  evolutionary  doctrine  consistently  considered  has  taken  away 
the  point  of  reference  for  our  values,  and  has  of  itself  been  unable 
(on  account  of  its  very  nature  as  a  descriptive  and  not  a  subjective 
study)  to  substitute  any  new  point  of  view.  The  total  effect  of  the 
scientific  teaching  on  the  question  of  values  has  tended  to  be  negative. 
The  realization  of  the  futility  of  such  destructive  criticism  alone  has 
begun  to  impress  itself  upon  our  thinking.  As  Santayana  says, 
"There  is  unfortunately  no  school  of  modern  philosophy  to  which  a 
critique  of  human  progress  can  well  be  attached.  Almost  every 
school  can  furnish  something  useful  to  the  critic,  sometimes  a  physical 
theory,  sometimes  a  piece  of  logical  analysis.  We  shall  need  to  go  to 
borrow  from  current  science  and  speculation  the  picture  they  draw 
of  man's  conditions,  his  environment,  his  history  and  mental  habits. 
These  may  furnish  a  theatre  and  properties  for  his  drama;  but  they 
offer  no  hint  of  its  plot  and  meaning.  A  great  imaginative  apathy 
has  fallen  on  the  mind."2 

Into  this  situation  of  philosophic  bankruptcy  Democracy  has  come 
with  a  new  vision  of  the  drama  of  human  life  to  relieve  the  world  of 
the  meaninglessness  of  an  unevaluated  universe.  It  is  the  new  faith, 
the  religious  inspiration  in  which  the  modern  man  finds  a  unification 
for  his  experiences  and  aspirations.  Though  it  is  not  yet  clear  in  its 

^obhouse,  Social  Evolution  and  Political  Theory,  Chap.  I.  pp.  7  ff. 
2The  Life  of  Reason,  Vol.  I,  page  9. 


20  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

implications  or  formulated  into  a  complete  system,  men  nevertheless 
feel  that  there  is  something  of  primordial  strength  and  of  immense 
significance  in  the  new  call.  It  has  begun  to  be  felt  and  even  feared 
as  the  potent  underlying  creative  force.  Men  envisage  in  it  the  Great 
Ideal  which  makes  life  worth  living  and  for  the  attainment  of  which 
it  is  necessary  to  dedicate  life.  In  this  it  comes  not  to  destroy  all 
other  religious  faiths  but  to  fulfill.  Its  prime  interest  in  the  welfare 
of  mankind  makes  it  a  completion  not  a  negation  of  former  religious 
aspirations. 

More  than  its  accompanying  characteristics  of  unification  of 
consciousness,  its  intensification  of  emotional  attitude  and  its  tendency 
toward  universalization  of  outlook,  Democracy  becomes  identified 
as  a  religious  striving  through  its  central  interest  in  the  life  of  man. 
All  the  great  religions  center  about  the  salvation  of  man.  Even 
when  philosophic  or  theologic  verbiage  have  so  dressed  up  a  religion 
as  to  make  it  seem  that  its  central  aspiration  is  for  an  abstract  idea 
or  to  praise  the  deity,  the  fundamental  interest  of  all  religions,  as  the 
modern  psychological  reinterpreters  of  the  value  of  religion  have 
clearly  demonstrated,  will  be  found  to  repeat  the  prophetic  message, 
"Seek  the  Lord  and  live."1  Democracy  like  all  religions  makes  man 
the  hero  of  the  universal  drama.  In  this  anxious  concern  for  human 
welfare  it  repeats  the  central  idea  in  all  religions,  the  anthropocentric 
conception  of  the  cosmos. 

Every  religion  in  addition  to  the  deep  interest  in  man's  life  has  also 
a  cosmology,  its  picture  of  the  world  theatre  in  which  man  plays 
the  heroic  part  and  a  ritual  or  method  of  action  by  which  the  end  is 
to  be  attained.  While  agreeing  in  their  main  aspiration  for  human 
welfare,  it  is  in  these  elements  of  cosmology  and  ritual  that  religions 
are  distinguished  from  one  another.  That  is  why  when  ceremonies 
are  given  up  and  cosmological  setting  changed — as,  for  instance,  when 
the  biblical  account  of  creation  is  abandoned — men  are  perhaps 
rightly  regarded  as  having  forsaken  their  old  religion.  Democracy, 
the  religion  of  the  modern  man,  has  a  new  cosmology — it  takes  for 
its  background  the  picture  of  the  genesis  and  development  of  the 
world  which  modern  science  and  speculation  have  drawn  for  us,  a 

'See  Josiah  Royce,  The  Sources  of  Religious  Insight,  Chap.  I. 


THE   DOCTRINES   OF   DEMOCRACY  21 

picture  far  more  gloriously  imaginative  than  any  of  the  ancient 
myths — and  a  correlated  ritual,  the  mechanistic  implications  of  the 
new  cosmology  which  demands  that  we  have  methods  which  are 
verifiably  efficient  and  that  between  cause  and  effect  no  mystic  gap 
will  enter.  Democracy  has  the  basic  elements  of  a  religion,  an  intense 
anxiety  for  the  salvation  of  man,  a  cosmology  in  the  broad  doctrine 
of  evolution  and  a  ritual  based  on  experience  and  on  science.1 

The  implications  of  the  new  faith  are,  of  course,  as  manifold  as 
are  life's  activities  and  what  the  applications  in  any  one  field  will  be 
must  occupy  many  men  for  many  generations.  It  can  hardly  be 
said  that  the  main  principles  have  received  formulation  into  a  system. 
Nevertheless  something  of  a  positive  and  definite  nature  can  already 
be  said.  The  remaining  portion  of  this  chapter  is  an  attempt  to  set 
down  some  of  the  basic  meanings  which  the  writer  believes  might  be 
considered  as  making  up  a  doctrinal  test,  so  to  speak,  for  communi- 
cants of  the  new  religion.  To  trace  out  some  of  the  fundamental 
notions  of  democracy  through  a  consideration  of  the  significances 
for  the  development  of  human  life  inherent  in  the  cosmology  of 
evolution  and  its  biological  connotations  is  our  next  problem. 

in 

THE  QUINTESSENCE  OF  DEMOCRACY 

Our  first  criterion  of  democracy  is  derived  from  the  negative 
teaching  of  the  doctrine  of  evolution  to  which  reference  has  already 
been  made  above,  namely,  the  denial  of  'design'  and  the  disintegration 

xPerhaps  the  nature  of  Democracy's  cosmology  and  so  called  ritual  prevents  our 
principle  from  being  rightly  called  a  religion.  It  is  the  use  of  magical  methods,  it  may 
be  said,  that  makes  a  process  "religious";  and,  since  the  implications  here  are  scientific 
and  mechanistic  they  cannot  be  considered  "religious."  But  no  sincere  modern  be- 
liever in  religion  will  admit  that  religion  must  be  "supernatural,"  must  violate  the  known 
scientific  laws.  That  would  resemble  the  timeworn  story  of  the  Sunday  School 
teacher  who  defined  faith  as  "something  we  know  to  be  untrue  and  which  we  believe 
in."  It  must  be  remembered  also  that  former  mythical  methods  were  not  considered 
so  by  their  users.  They  were  the  most  practical  known  in  reference  to  the  puzzling 
problems  of  human  welfare  for  which  they  were  utilized.  So,  too,  methods  which 
may  seem  practical  to  us,  based  on  reliable  experience,  may  in  many  instances  seem 
fantastic  and  inadequate  to  a  later  and  wiser  age.  We  must  never  lose  sight  of  the 
fact  that  our  own  methods,  however  efficient  they  may  seem,  are  practical  for  ends 
whose  value  rests  upon  the  assumption  that  man's  life  is  supremely  worth  while — an 


22  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

of  the  prevailing  belief  in  a  conscious  creator  which  permitted  dis- 
cussion of  values  without  mentioning  their  reference.  One  who 
speaks  about  values  to-day  must  state  openly  the  position  from  which 
he  judges  the  world,  otherwise  he  is  taking  the  name  of  the  Lord  in 
vain  and  is  a  veritable  scoffer  who  has  no  respect  for  sacredness  of 
meaning.  Even  modern  apologists  of  the  absolutistic  position  must 
admit  that  value  is  in  its  meaning  essentially  relative  and  can  become 
absolute  only  with  reference  to  some  assumed  point  of  view.1 

Since  the  points  of  view  from  which  we  may  look  upon  the  world 
are  infinite  in  number,  we  must  come  to  a  pluralistic  conception  of 
value,  truth,  reality,  etc.,  unless  we  arbitrarily  assume  some  definite 
standpoint.  The  values  and  goods  of  the  world  are  as  numerous  as 
are  the  possibilities  of  analysis  into  units  of  existence,  or,  in  other 
words,  infinite.  Were  we  really  impartial  and  did  we  look  upon  the 
world  with  no  bias,  every  activity  would  be  equally  valuable  for  it 
could  be  conceived  as  furthering  something.  For  the  good  would 
need  to  be  considered  not  from  any  external  point  of  view  but  from 
the  immediate  and  internal  aspect  of  the  being  concerned.  Even 
processes  which  we  call  'disintegrating'  would  seem  proper  if  we 
were  not  in  the  least  concerned.  In  accordance  with  the  doctrine 
of  the  "survival  of  the  fittest"  anything  existing  at  any  particular 
time  would  need  to  be  considered  fit.  A  thoroughly  naturalistic 
religion  pressing  its  doctrine  to  the  logical  extreme  would  look  upon 
all  being  as  sacred  and  judge  all  values  as  absolute  from  their  own 
point  of  reference  (in  opposition  to  the  theological  conception  which 
considers  things  as  worth  while  only  from  one  fixed  point  of  view). 
There  would  be,  so  to  speak,  a  thoroughgoing  democracy  in  the 
world,  for  all  things  would  be  regarded  as  free  and  equal. 

Here  indeed  we  have  the  clue  that  brings  us  to  the  quintessence 
of  the  democratic  doctrine.  The  tendency  to  regard  everything  as 
an  end  in  itself  is  the  fountainhead  from  which  springs  the  new 
view  of  the  world.  With  far-reaching  vision  does  Walt  Whitman 
define  Democracy.  "The  quality  of  Being  in  the  object's  self  ac- 

assumption  that  is  based  on  desire,  faith,  and  the  will  to  existence.  The  analogy  of 
Democracy  with  a  religion  is  not  necessary  for  the  subsequent  argument  and  should 
not  be  taken  too  strictly. 

JHugo  Munsterberg,  Eternal  Values,  Chap.  I,  p.  9;   Chap.  VI,  p.  76. 


THE   DOCTRINES   OF   DEMOCRACY  28 

cording  to  its  own  central  idea  and  purpose,  and  of  growing  there- 
from and  thereto — not  by  criticism  of  other  standards  and  adjust- 
ments thereto — is  the  lesson  of  Nature."1  The  seer  of  Democracy, 
looking  beyond  temporary  embodiments  and  manifestations,  gives 
us  his  creed  in  the  terms  of  its  ultimate  aspiration. 

Were  the  world  so  harmoniously  arranged  that  it  would  be  possible 
to  treat  all  beings  both  on  the  plane  of  the  human  and  below  it  as  if 
they  were  ends  in  themselves,  we  would  not  speak  of  such  an  aspira- 
tion as  this  in  religious  terms.  But  existences  conflict  with  each 
other.  The  hypotheses  of  the  universal  presence  of  force  at  the 
foundation  of  all  our  evolutionary  doctrine  makes  conflict  an  inevita- 
ble factor  in  our  universe — a  conflict  out  of  which  rise  integrated 
forms  and  the  struggle  for  survival  including  the  struggle  of  desire 
with  desire,  of  man  with  man,  of  species  with  species.  Of  these 
conflicts  are  born  our  ideals.  Without  this  conflict  we  would  have 
no  philosophy  and  no  religion,  for  these  obviously  are  harmonizing 
principles,  describing  universes  better  than  the  one  we  live  in,  with 
the  hope  that  the  actual  world  will  be  brought  somewhat  nearer  the 
ideal  conception.  In  so  far  as  it  is  a  religion  democracy  does  not 
describe  a  condition  already  existing;  it  reflects  an  aspiration. 
Democracy  finds  its  significance  in  the  attempt  to  multiply  the  things  in 
the  world  which  may  be  considered  as  ends  in  themselves. 

This  broad  and  general  statement  of  the  essential  meaning  of 
democracy  is,  however,  to  be  considered  a  sort  of  Messianic  hope, 
pointing  the  direction  but  not  giving  the  limits  of  practical  realiza- 
tion. The  Universe  cannot  be  saved  all  at  once;  in  a  practical  and 
realizable  program  there  are  always  limitations.  It  is  with  Man 
that  we  are  most  concerned.  The  prophet  who  dreams  that  the  lion 
shall  eat  straw  like  the  ox  is  in  reality  interested  not  in  the  animal 
kingdom  but  in  the  relations  of  men  to  men;  and  so  democracy, 
too,  has  the  human  being  at  heart  primarily.  Walt  Whitman's 
definition  is  meant  above  all  to  apply  to  men,  and  might  be  para- 
phrased, "The  quality  of  Being  inherent  in  the  Self  according  to  its 
own  central  idea  and  purpose  and  of  growing  therefrom  and  thereto, — 

Democratic  Vistas.  Though  Whitman  happens  to  use  the  word  Nature  in  this 
sentence  he  has  really  set  out  to  define  Democracy. 


24  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

not  by  criticism  of  other  standards  and  adjustments  thereto — is  the 
teaching  of  Democracy."  Whatever  will  be  the  aspiration  of  future 
epochs,  in  our  own  age  the  religion  of  democracy  consists  in  the 
aspiration  to  construct  a  world  in  which  it  will  be  possible  to  live  in 
accordance  with  the  Kantian  formula,  to  regard  every  human  being 
as  an  end,  not  as  a  means  merely. 

Democracy  assumes  an  anthropocentric  world,  which  as  noted 
above  is  a  characteristic  that  it  has  in  common  with  all  religions. 
It  should  be  noted,  however,  that  the  naturalistic  origin  of  our  creed 
has  left  its  trace  on  the  attitude  which  the  democratic  mind  takes 
toward  all  values.  Under  a  theologic  conception  the  tendency  is  to 
look  upon  the  world  as  condemned,  and  to  find  in  it  values  only  as 
they  are  seen  to  serve  some  accepted  higher  principle.  In  the 
democratic  attitude,  though  we  may  reject  the  extreme  of  regarding 
everything  as  valuable,  we  are  nevertheless  left  with  a  tolerant  feeling 
toward  all  life  even  that  which  does  not  immediately  concern  us.  In 
the  one  case,  every  activity  stands  condemned  before  the  bar  of 
thought  unless  it  can  show  itself  serviceable  for  aims  which  have 
valid  precedents;  in  the  other  case,  illustrating  what  is  fundamental 
in  a  democratic  mode  of  thought,  the  defendant  must  be  considered 
as  innocent  until  it  can  be  shown  that  there  is  a  definite  violation. 
This  difference  of  attitude  is  the  crux  of  the  whole  matter  and  will 
be  important  in  our  discussion  of  diverging  forms  of  culture  and 
individuality.  The  difference  is  a  fundamental  one;  the  one  mode 
of  thought  will  tend  to  lead  to  a  suppression  of  everything  which 
diverges  from  the  established,  the  other  mode  to  that  liberation  of 
forces  which  is  necessary  for  the  creation  of  a  fuller  and  richer  life. 

Tke  democratic  conception  would  look  with  tolerance  upon  all 
forms  of  life  and  would  endeavor  to  understand  them  from  their  own 
point  of  view.  With  reference  to  human  individuality  democracy 
would  go  even  further;  it  considers  personality  as  absolutely  sacred, 
and  its  exploitation  as  the  worst  form  of  sacrilege.1 

This  supreme  belief  in  the  person  is  perhaps  in  the  last  analysis 
like  all  else  in  human  life  based  upon  instinct  and  desire,  a  result  of  the 
will  to  live,  a  part  of  that  assumption  which  places  man  at  the  center 

*Cf.  David  Jayne  Hill,  Americanism,  What  is  it?     Chap.  IV,  pp.  133  ff. 


THE   DOCTRINES   OF   DEMOCRACY  25 

of  the  Universe.  Since  human  individuals  are  alone  articulate,  it 
would  be  strange  indeed  if  this  fundamental  fact  had  not  left  its  traces 
in  our  philosophy.  If  a  man  speaks  sincerely  he  must  reveal  what  in 
his  own  experience  (which  is  in  part  a  personal  experience)  has  seemed 
valuable.  Nevertheless,  in  addition  to  these  natural  causes  there 
seems  to  be  sufficient  rational  justification  for  emphasis  on  the  human 
individual  once  we  have  agreed  that  democracy  finds  its  significance 
in  the  desire  to  multiply  the  things  in  the  world  which  may  be  con- 
sidered as  ends  in  themselves.  The  self-conscious  nature  of  human 
individuality  makes  it  worthy  of  this  preeminent  consideration. 

In  comparison  with  the  whole  plane  of  beings  below  the  human, 
the  human  being  is  alone  capable  of  realizing  the  significance  of  his 
own  nature.  Cows  have  no  conception  of  the  purpose  that  animates 
their  breeding  and  do  not  suffer  from  the  memory  of  the  lot  of  their 
fellows  or  from  a  prevision  of  the  end  which  overshadows  them. 
The  term  exploitation  loses  its  sinister  connotation  when  applied  to 
beings  on  a  low  plane  of  consciousness;  for  the  realization  that  any 
control  is  external  is  the  other  side  of  self -consciousness  and  can  exist 
only  in  direct  proportion  to  the  extent  to  which  one's  own  nature  is 
known.  While  wanton  destructiveness  and  cruelty  are  repulsive 
to  a  humane  nature,  a  too  anxious  solicitude  concerning  animal 
individuality  and  the  integrity  of  natural  forms  would  savor  of 
sentimentality  in  a  world  in  which  the  majority  of  human  beings 
are  not  yet  considered  as  living  for  themselves.  Democracy,  in  a 
practical  way,  insists  that  the  most  sensitive  organism  above  all  must 
be  saved  from  exploitation. 

On  the  other  hand,  by  comparison  with  existences  which  are 
superindividual,  like  the  family,  the  state,  society,  etc.,  the  exploi- 
tation of  the  individual  alone  would  appear  really  cruel.  Poetically, 
we  can  speak  of  these  groups  as  if  they  were  individuals  and  had  souls, 
as  it  were.  Actually,  however,  they  lack  a  sensorium  and  must  be 
directed  in  their  action  through  individuals.  The  individual  has 
purposes  which  it  is  true  cannot  be  fulfilled  except  through  living 
in  a  social  world.  But  how  could  a  group  have  values  except  through 
its  constituent  individuals  and  in  the  last  analysis  for  their  sake? 
By  talking  about  society  as  if  it  were  a  single  entity  we  are  only  too 


26 

apt  in  our  romanticism  to  commit  to  martyrdom  the  many  individ- 
uals who  are  in  reality  self-conscious  and  for  whom  exploitation, 
therefore,  is  so  malignant. 

In  the  third  place,  even  if  our  point  of  view  were  not  anthropo- 
centric  and  individualistic,  but  thoroughly  natural  and  objective, 
it  would  appear  to  be  the  pragmatic  thing  to  do  (in  a  world  which  by 
hypothesis  is  not  ideal)  to  set  up  first  of  all  the  self-conscious  entities 
as  the  supreme  ends  of  creation.  Self -consciousness  is  no  inner  self- 
ebullition,  but  a  knowledge  of  one's  relationship  to  other  human  beings 
and  to  the  whole  outer  world.  A  deeper  self -consciousness  means  not 
an  intensification  of  the  ego,  but  a  realization  of  how  many  other 
persons,  things  and  ideas  are  necessary  for  the  fulfillment  of  one's  own 
life.  Men  must  realize  as  they  begin  to  understand  their  needs  how 
dependent  upon  society  they  are.  Thus  it  is  that  society  as  a  whole 
is  served  by  promoting  the  good  of  the  individuals  within  it.  Surely 
if  the  individuals  in  any  society  are  satisfying  their  highest  desires 
the  whole  society  must  be  accomplishing  its  function.  On  the  other 
hand  a  nation  can  still  continue  to  exist  while  many  of  its  citizens  are 
killed  or  unhappy.  And  again  referring  to  the  plane  of  lower  exist- 
ences it  is  inconceivable  that  the  lower  animal  or  the  plant  should 
learn  to  understand  what  man's  nature  is  and  save  it  from  exploita- 
tion. It  is  more  reasonable  to  expect  man  to  be  able  to  understand 
the  ends  of  lower  beings  and  prevent  them  from  exploitation.  The 
self-conscious  individual  is  the  most  complex  being.  Since  he  is 
dependent  upon  the  world  to  the  greatest  extent  he  must  learn  to 
preserve  more  and  more  of  the  world.  Comparatively  speaking  it 
is  more  economical  to  start  with  the  self-conscious  individual;  for 
if  the  world  has  the  ideal  possibility  of  becoming  a  place  where  a 
great  variety  of  beings  may  pursue  their  existences  harmoniously 
then  the  chances  for  increasing  the  number  of  such  self-determining 
entities  are  greatest  when  we  begin  with  the  self-conscious  beings. 

Self-consciousness  thus  provides  a  clear  reason  for  centering  our 
attention  on  the  individual;  it  gives  to  the  reality  of  the  human 
individual  an  unmatched  intensity,  makes  the  idea  of  exploitation 
intolerably  sinister,  and  assures  us  that  Man  must  ultimately  realize 
the  necessity  of  a  rich  natural  environment  and  of  a  complex  social 


THE    DOCTRINES   OF   DEMOCRACY  27 

order.  While  all  beings  in  the  world  seem  worthy  of  perpetuation, 
the  human  individual  seems  most  worthy.  His  survival  more  than 
that  of  any  other  being  will  lead  to  the  conservation  of  life.  So,  too, 
within  the  group  of  human  individuals,  those  who  are  most  self- 
conscious,  i.e.,  who  realize  most  truly  their  dependence  upon  nature, 
upon  other  human  beings  and  upon  social  institutions,  are  most 
worthy  of  being  preserved.  Maintaining  the  very  doctrine  that 
individuality  is  sacred,  we  must  come  to  the  conclusion  that  individ- 
ualism in  the  sense  of  selfishness  is  an  abomination.  Only  those  men 
who  can  live  without  exploiting  others  are  desirable  in  a  world  in 
which  all  personalities  are  considered  sacred.  To  admit  anything 
else  would  be  to  negate  the  basic  assumption.  Like  the  God  of 
Israel  the  God  of  Democracy  is  a  jealous  God,  the  one  jealous  for 
the  principle  of  social  justice,  the  other  jealous  for  the  creed  of  respect 
for  personality.  That  individual  in  the  world  is  most  worthy  of 
preservation  for  whose  fulfillment  the  free  expression  of  the  individ- 
ualities of  other  men  is  also  a  necessity  and  for  the  upbuilding  of 
whose  life  a  rich  world  is  the  prerequisite.  He  is  the  highly  self- 
conscious  individual  who  understands  his  dependence  upon  the 
world.1 

Self-consciousness  translated  into  terms  of  action  becomes  self- 
determination.  Forged  through  the  greatest  upheaval  in  human 
history  to  express  the  ideal  of  the  democracies  of  the  world  this  new 
phrase  might  well  serve  to  convey  the  essential  meaning  of  the  Kantian 
doctrine  and  of  the  vision  of  Walt  Whitman.  Self-determination  is 
the  quintessence  of  democracy.  Values  must  be  related  to  the  self 
if  they  are  to  be  in  truth  goods  and  the  individual  must  be  regarded 
as  his  own  end. 

This  idea  will  give  us  the  orientation;  but  the  term  'self-determina- 
tion,' clear  as  it  is  in  reference  to  intent,  is  still  too  vague  to  use  as  a 
standard;  it  does  not  imply  the  conditions  of  its  own  fulfillment. 
The  specific  criteria  of  democracy  will  need  to  take  into  consideration 
the  terms  which  limit  the  possibility  of  free  self -development. 


1For  an  excellent  discussion  of  the  significance  of  self -consciousness  for  individuality, 
see  Warner  Fite,  Individualism. 


28  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

IV 

THE  CRITERIA  OF  DEMOCRACY 
UNIQUENESS  OF  EVALUATION 

It  is  fundamental  to  remember  that  each  individual  is  a  unique 
specimen;  human  individuals  are  not  copies  of  each  other  like  so 
many  buttons  turned  out  by  the  same  machine.  Our  doctrine  of 
evolution  would  impress  upon  us  the  heterogeneity  within  each 
species  and  the  tendency  for  greater  individual  diversification  as  the 
species  reaches  higher  levels.  This  primary  fact  of  individual 
differences  must  be  taken  into  the  first  reckoning  in  our  evaluation  of 
the  good.  The  unique  nature  of  the  particular  individual  involved 
must  become  the  reference  point  if  we  are  seeking  a  real  benefit  for 
him.  The  extent  to  which  it  is  possible  in  any  given  society  to  under- 
stand each  individual's  good  and  to  include  it  into  the  social  good 
becomes  the  limit  of  democracy. 

The  traditional  tendency  has  been  to  pass  judgment  on  persons 
in  accordance  with  some  group  in  which  they  were  classed.  Race, 
sex,  social  class  or  church  were  for  the  most  part  considered  to  be  the 
determining  factors  in  assigning  to  the  individual  a  place  in  society. 
The  presumption  was  that  difference  in  some  characteristics  carried 
with  it  similar  differences  in  respect  to  the  total  character.  Classi- 
fication seems  to  have  the  result  of  investing  a  person  with  a  sort  of 
quality  which  makes  him  what  he  is.  Against  this  attitude  of  mind 
the  democratic  conception  would  insist  that  the  character  of  each 
individual  should  be  directly  examined  in  order  to  ascertain  what  he 
is.  A  person  is  what  he  is,  because  he  is  so,  not  because  he  belongs 
to  a  certain  class. 

This  tendency  in  democracy,  to  approach  the  matter  in  hand 
directly,  is  matched  by  a  similar  development  in  the  conception  of 
cause.  In  primitive  stages  of  thought  when  men  sought  the  cause  of 
a  phenomenon,  they  did  not  seek  it  in  the  phenomenon  under  examina- 
tion, but  in  some  other  object  or  process.  To  control,  little  interest 
or  study  was  given  to  the  matter  to  be  controlled;  the  endeavor  was 
to  exert  influence  through  something  external  which  was  considered 
as  having  a  dominating  potency.  The  disease  which  had  come  over 


THE   DOCTRINES   OF   DEMOCRACY  29 

a  man  was  considered  as  quite  separate  from  the  man.  It  had 
entered  into  him.  The  ensuing  activity,  therefore,  was  to  do  some- 
thing not  to  the  man  but  to  the  evil  spirits  which  needed  to  be  expelled. 
In  the  cosmic  scheme,  God  and  creation  were  considered  as  quite 
distinct  and  the  world  was  to  be  controlled  not  by  mastering  creation, 
but  by  appealing  in  some  way  to  God. 

In  science  to-day  the  tendency  is  to  seek  the  cause  in  the  very 
subject  under  consideration,  not  in  the  distant  far-off  external  rela- 
tionships. We  find  the  'cause'  in  the  immediately  preceding  and 
surrounding  conditions;  i.e.,  we  find  it  more  useful  from  the  point  of 
view  of  control  to  know  what  immediately  precedes  and  surrounds. 
We  refuse  to  be  satisfied  with  the  intuition  of  a  connection  between 
this  before  us  and  that  remote  ultimate.  Even  if  the  ultimate  can 
influence  the  immediate  object  at  hand,  it  must  be  through  inter- 
mediate connections  which  must  in  the  last  analysis  be  contiguous 
with  the  immediate  object.  So  we  begin  with  the  matter  at  hand  and 
seek  to  gain  control  over  the  nearby  conditions. 

Cause,  therefore,  is  to  be  sought  in  the  peculiar  organization  of  the 
specific  instance  in  question,  not  in  any  external  fact  or  object,  which 
on  account  of  some  overt  similarity  or  some  other  process  of  associa- 
tion or  some  mystical  connection  is  assumed  to  exercise  potency  over 
it.  So  closely  have  cause  and  effect  approached  each  other  in  modern 
thinking  that  the  use  of  these  words  tends  to  give  a  false  connotation 
of  disparateness,  when  in  reality  they  have  come  to  mean  two  aspects 
of  or  stages  in  the  same  process. 

The  mechanistic  interpretation  of  the  universe  as  against  an  idea 
of  creator  and  creation;  the  attempt  to  get  at  heredity  not  on  the 
basis  of  external  resemblances  of  relatives,  but  through  a  study  of  the 
germ  plasm;  the  explanation  of  human  nature  not  by  means  of 
'faculties',  but  in  terms  of  the  organization  of  the  nervous  system; 
the  analysis  of  historical  phenomena  by  examining  the  local  and 
contemporaneous  conditions  rather  than  harking  back  to  supposed 
'origins';  and  in  philosophy  the  finding  of  purposes  not  in  some  exter- 
nal Authority  or  Law  or  Society,  but  in  the  functioning  organism — 
all  these  seem  to  be  products  of  working  with  intrinsic,  immediately 
related  conditions. 


30  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

This  attitude  of  seeking  the  'cause'  in  the  sphere  of  efficient  condi- 
tion, in  the  particular,  immediate,  internal,  specific  organization  of  the 
business  in  question  rather  than  primarily  in  the  realm  of  'final  causes' 
in  the  general,  ultimate,  external,  mystical  relationships,  is  the 
attitude  to  be  borne  in  mind  when  we  approach  the  task  of  under- 
standing the  nature  of  any  individual.  To  come  as  near  home  as 
possible,  to  endeavor  to  begin  from  within,  is  part  of  the  democratic 
doctrine  of  self-determination. 

Race,  color,  class,  sex,  social  position  are  themselves  at  best 
only  hints  concerning  the  individuals  to  whom  we  wish  to  refer. 
They  are  not  powers  or  spirits  which  enter  into  the  individual 
and  make  him  what  he  is.  To  understand,  for  instance,  what  place 
a  person  who  happens  to  be  a  woman  ought  to  play  in  our  social 
organization,  it  would  be  in  the  democratic  spirit  to  ascertain  just 
what  she  could  do  from  an  impartial  test  of  her  capabilities,  rather 
than  to  assign  a  preconceived  status,  determined  altogether  by  one 
factor,  that  of  sex.  The  movement  of  democracy  is  to  get  away  from 
such  pre judgments  on  the  basis  of  one  factor  (a  procedure  which  is 
bound  to  bring  about  a  judgment  by  an  external  standard)  and  to  get 
as  close  as  possible  to  the  actual  individual,  as  near  as  possible  to 
his  own  unique  nature.  The  same  line  of  reasoning  which  forbids 
absolute  values,  related  to  a  conceptual  God,  precludes  values  related 
to  conceptual  Classes.1 

It  is  the  unique  person  to  whom  values  must  be  related.  We  fulfill 
the  demands  of  our  relativistic  conception  of  value  only  in  the  degree 
that  we  give  due  consideration  to  the  individual's  nature  involved. 
In  thinking  about  the  good,  the  point  of  departure  from  which  our  reckon- 
ing begins  must  be  the  individual  persons  who  are  most  closely  concerned 
in  the  situation — that  is  the  first  prerequisite  of  a  democratic  proce- 
dure. Because  we  are  incapable  of  realizing  in  its  fulness  and  in- 
tensity the  experience  of  others  (we  seem,  too,  naturally  disinclined 
to  do  so)  the  practical  application  of  democracy  involves  the  setting 
up  of  machinery  which  will  enable  men  to  control  the  policies  that 

'The  type  of  state  outlined  in  Plato's  Republic,  for  instance,  with  its  threefold  classi- 
fication, is  in  effect  an  undemocratic  conception.  While  the  individuals  are  classified 
supposedly  with  due  respect  to  their  natures,  the  assumption  that  there  are  only  three 
types  would  give  little  scope  to  individuality. 


THE   DOCTRINES   OF   DEMOCRACY  31 

govern  them.  For  this  reason  "consent  of  the  governed"  is  regarded 
as  the  basic  principle  in  political  democracy.  Participation  in  the 
control  of  any  activity  which  vitally  affects  the  course  of  one's  life 
becomes  the  safeguard  of  human  liberty.  The  word  'self -determina- 
tion' expresses  so  happily  the  essential  meaning  of  democracy  because 
it  implies  that  the  ultimate  judgment  of  the  good  and  the  final  power 
over  one's  fate  must  rest  with  the  living  subject  of  experience. 

Since  the  individual  undergoing  an  experience  is  alone  capable  of 
realizing  to  the  full  the  value  of  any  experience,  we  might  conclude 
(granting  that  he  accords  to  every  other  individual  the  respect  of 
personality  which  he  demands  for  himself)  that  the  individual 
himself  must  in  the  last  analysis  be  the  ultimate  and  only  judge  of 
the  salvation  which  is  in  accordance  with  his  own  nature.  Such  is 
perhaps  the  case,  but  it  will  be  well  to  see  in  what  important  directions 
the  validity  of  his  judgment  must  be  practically  limited. 


DIVERSITY  IN  THE  ENVIRONMENT 

We  can  speak  of  judgment  on  the  part  of  the  individual  only  when 
he  has  a  variety  of  possibilities  of  experience  from  which  to  choose. 
When  there  is  only  one  possible  mode  of  responding  either  in  act  or 
in  imagination  there  can  be  no  judgment  in  the  true  sense.  In  accord- 
ance with  the  biological  conception  underlying  this  discussion  the 
individual  is  conceived  as  an  organism  responding  to  an  environment 
and  learning  through  the  satisfactions  and  dissatisfactions  accom- 
panying his  reactions  to  choose  what  for  him  is  the  good  and  to 
reject  the  evil.  There  must  be  present  a  multiplicity  of  material 
and  ideal  objects  to  which  to  respond  before  a  free  choice  becomes 
possible. 

The  removal  of  governmental  and  social  restraints  which  prevent 
some  from  enjoying  the  benefits  already  conferred  upon  others  is 
only  the  first  step  in  the  attainment  of  freedom.  For  its  full  develop- 
ment it  is  necessary  to  create  continuously  new  possibilities  in  the 
surroundings.  A  richly  diversified  natural  mental  and  social  environ- 
ment must  be  present  before  the  individual  can  be  thought  of  as 
reacting  in  accordance  with  his  own  nature.  America  must  be  justly 


32  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

considered  democratic  even  more  because  it  is  the  golden  land  of 
opportunity  than  because  it  opposes  privilege.  The  popular  con- 
ception colored  b.y  the  long,  difficult  struggle  for  equal  rights  natur- 
ally emphasizes  most  the  personal  aspect  implied  in  the  phrase  equality 
of  opportunity.  But  equality  alone  is  negative  and  empty  when  not 
joined  to  a  multiplicity  of  opportunity.  "The  troubles  of  the  many 
— that  is  hah*  consolation,"  so  runs  a  Hebrew  proverb.  The  indi- 
vidual human  undoubtedy  finds  some  measure  of  satisfaction  in 
realizing  that  he  is  no  worse  off  than  his  fellow.  An  intelligent  and 
positive  conception,  however,  will  stress  the  impersonal  condition  of 
freedom — a  manifold  diverse  opportunity.  The  presence  of  a  variety 
of  possibilities  is  the  sine  qua  non  of  freedom,  and  defining  from  the 
point  of  view  of  the  environment  the  only  real  meaning  that  the  term 
can  have. 

The  mere  existence  of  objects  and  ideas  obviously  does  not  imply 
that  all  will  react;  to  be  present  in  the  environment  signifies  also  a 
potentiality  on  the  part  of  the  organism.  Fundamentally  important 
differences  of  instinctive  endowment  affect  the  possibility  of  response. 
Original  nature,  therefore,  gives  both  the  possibility  of  freedom  and 
its  limitations.  So,  too,  the  modifications  upon  the  nervous  system 
known  as  habit  formation  have  their  effect  upon  the  possibilities  of 
reaction.  Habit,  too,  makes  possible,  but  at  the  same  time  may  limit 
freedom.  The  establishment  of  fixed  modes  of  reaction  permits 
the  organism  to  engage  the  attention  in  new  fields.  Fixed  habits 
are  necessary  to  relieve  the  mind  from  the  many  harassing  details 
of  the  daily  routine  of  physical  and  social  living.  The  number  of 
situations  into  which  we  are  thrown  is  so  great  that  it  would  be 
impossible  to  consider  in  each  case  what  would  be  the  best  type  of 
reaction.  In  many  cases  nearly  any  mode  of  reaction  would  do  nearly 
as  well;  in  other  cases  age-long  experimentation  has  evolved 
customs  which  have  justified  themselves  in  practice.  In  all  such 
instances  the  development  of  habits  serves  freedom.  The  danger 
lurks  when  habits  are  established  in  reference  to  matters  where 
freedom  of  choice  is  all  important.  For  this  reason  individualists 
have  often  warned  that  the  only  habit  to  form  is  the  habit  to  form 
no  habit. 


THE   DOCTRINES   OF   DEMOCRACY  33 

In  any  matter  in  which  freedom  is  considered  of  great  moment 
fixation  of  habit  setting  up  an  unalterable  reaction  amounts  really 
to  a  limitation  of  environment.  Habit  formation  can  even  be  used 
as  a  means  for  the  suppression  of  freedom.  By  bringing  about  an 
immediate  and  fixed  response  the  organism  becomes  less  able  to  choose, 
for  as  a  matter  of  fact  it  no  longer  has  the  possibility  of  several 
reactions.  When  the  series  of  habits  acquired  was  originally  con- 
trived with  little  consideration  of  the  person  in  whom  the  habit  is 
later  fixed  and  the  process  is  calculated  to  further  the  interests  of 
those  who  implant  them,  habit  formation  becomes  indoctrination. 
Indoctrination  limits  freedom  by  closing  the  imagination  to  any  but 
the  ideas  which  have  been  indoctrinated.  When  one  comes  under 
the  influence  of  only  one  language,  one  literature,  one  church  or  one 
school  system,  the  tendency  in  a  sense  is  toward  indoctrination.  A 
good  illustration  is  the  parochial  school  which  takes  all  the  child's 
time,  sets  up  definite  ideas  as  exclusively  the  true  ones,  and  prevents 
the  child  from  coming  under  other  influences  than  its  own.  Similar, 
too,  may  be  the  effect  of  state  control  of  the  public  schools,  although 
in  a  different  direction.  If  the  public  school  demands  practically  all 
of  the  child's  time,  education  can  avoid  becoming  indoctrination 
only  when  the  diversity  and  richness  of  the  curriculum  matches  with 
the  uniqueness  of  each  child's  nature. 

An  understanding  of  the  organic  nature  of  the  individual  would 
make  us  insist  that  greater  diversification  of  possibilities  to  react 
to  can  alone  lead  to  freedom.  Since  the  organism  cannot  react  to 
nothingness,  it  is  only  by  offering  additional  ways  of  doing  things 
that  liberation  from  the  necessity  of  reacting  in  one  way  can  come. 
The  mediaeval  serf,  whose  slavery  depended  upon  the  fact  that  he 
was  bound  to  the  land,  would  not  have  received  freedom  if  land  were, 
so  to  speak,  abolished;  only  by  being  permitted  to  move  from  place 
to  place,  i.e.,  to  be  in  many  lands,  could  freedom  be  attained.  To 
be  relieved  from  the  hardship  that  expression  imposes  upon  thought, 
it  would  be  necessary  not  to  become  ignorant  of  all  language,  but  to 
know  more  of  the  languages.  To  be  a  free  thinker  it  is  necessary  to 
understand  and  at  least  in  a  sense  believe  in  many  religions,  not  to 
be  ignorant  and  skeptical  of  all.  Especially  if  we  have  in  mind  any 


34  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

high  degree  of  individual  uniqueness,  as  we  have  in  our  conception 
of  the  self-conscious  individual,  we  must  assume  an  environment 
with  diversified  possibilities.  Organic  uniqueness  and  dependence 
upon  a  diversified  environment  proceed  together.  The  conception 
of  the  individual  as  an  organic  entity  must  immediately  lead  us  to 
a  positive  conception  of  freedom,  and  to  the  insistence  upon  a  diversi- 
fication of  environment  as  well  as  upon  a  uniqueness  of  evaluation. 
In  addition,  then,  to  the  necessity  of  regarding  each  individual  as 
unique,  a  second  prerequisite  of  self-determination  will  be  an  environ- 
ment rich  in  possibilities  of  thought  and  act. 

The  term  'organism'  includes  the  ideas  of  an  environment  and  of  a 
relationship  between  the  organism  and  the  environment.  The  dis- 
tinctions, 'organism,'  'environment,'  'reaction,'  are  mental  discrimi- 
nations; in  nature  these  three  are  aspects  of  one  unitary  process. 
Any  one  of  the  terms  must  imply  the  other  two,  for  they  are  all 
correlative.  It  is  the  interest  of  the  particular  discussion  that  will 
determine  the  standpoint  from  which  to  view  the  whole  process.  In 
the  discussion  above,  conceiving  the  process  from  the  point  of  view 
of  the  individual  organism,  we  were  led  to  emphasize  the  need  of 
each  individual  organism  as  unique.  Taking  the  environmental  at- 
titude, it  was  shown  that  diversity  of  possibilities  is  necessary  if  the 
organism  is  to  have  freedom  to  react.  Our  third  criterion  will  be 
developed  by  examining  the  question  from  the  point  of  view  of  the 
relating  principle,  the  interdependence  of  organism  and  environ- 
ment. 

SOCIALIZATION 

The  first  standard  of  democracy  stressed  the  importance  of  the 
realization  of  the  uniqueness  of  each  individual  as  basic  to  any 
meaningful  conception  of  value.  This  argument  will  have  been 
completely  misunderstood,  however,  if  the  idea  of  uniqueness  has 
been  confused  with  that  of  disparateness.  Each  moment  in  a  life- 
time is  a  unique  experience,  but  time  would  be  inconceivable  if  the 
moment  were  regarded  as  separate  and  unrelated  to  the  preceding 
and  succeeding  moments.  Each  act  and  each  thought,  though  unique, 
has  its  background  and  its  references,  its  'causes'  and  'results'.  So, 


THE   DOCTRINES   OF  DEMOCRACY  35 

too,  uniqueness  of  the  individual  does  not  imply  a  separation  from, 
and  lack  of  relation  to,  other  things  and  men.  Quite  the  contrary. 
Uniqueness  depends  upon  the  peculiar  organization  of  relationships, 
and  no  great  degree  of  uniqueness  can  exist  without  a  corresponding 
complexity  of  organization  which  of  course  involves  a  multiplicity 
and  complexity  of  relationships.  Organic  uniqueness  and  depend- 
ence upon  a  diversified  environment  must  proceed  pari  passu 
because  they  are  in  fact  the  same  things.  The  individuality  of  a  man 
consists  in  the  relationship  that  he  bears  to  the  world;  it  is  the  world 
from  his  point  of  view. 

Man's  dependence  is  upon  the  whole  of  Nature — things,  ideas  and 
persons.  The  individual  can  exist  neither  physically  nor  as  the  fig- 
ment of  a  conception  without  dependence  in  some  measure  on  one  or 
all  of  these  three  aspects  of  the  environment*  As  his  individuality 
develops,  the  dependence  upon  ideas  and  persons  becomes  of  more 
significant  importance.  In  so  far  as  any  individual  at  any  moment 
recalls  the  relevant  experiences  of  the  past  and  foresees  the  references 
to  possible  future  happenings,  and  in  the  degree  that  he  realizes  in 
true  measure  the  dependences  upon  which  his  own  individuality 
rests,  he  will  be  true  to  his  own  nature.  Man  does  not  live  by  bread 
alone;  a  complexity  of  social  and  spiritual  relationships  is  necessary 
for  his  welfare.  To  understand  that  all  relationships  have  signifi- 
cances wider  than  the  present  application  and  to  assume  the  responsi- 
bility that  they  imply,  is  a  part  of  democracy.  Nothing  in  the  world 
that  we  can  discover  is  irrelevant  to  our  existence,  and  nothing  that 
we  do  or  neglect  to  do  can  fail  to  influence  ourselves  and  the  world. 
The  extent  to  which  the  individual  realizes  his  many  interdependences 
becomes  the  third  criterion  of  democracy. 

Democratic  thought  has  in  view  especially  our  relations  to  other 
persons.  A  natural  view  of  things  unbiased  by  anthropomorphism, 
as  we  have  noted  earlier  in  this  chapter,  would  regard  all  nature  as 
sacred  and  all  beings  as  ends  in  themselves.  The  democratic  view, 
accepting  this  outlook,  nevertheless  assumes  the  prior  importance  of 
human  life  and  insists  on  the  sanctity  of  each  person  as  the  highest 
good.  So  also  here,  logically  insisting  on  the  importance  of  all 
dependences,  the  crucial  interest  of  the  democratic  aspiration  turns 
about  mankind  and  on  the  relation  of  men  to  each  other. 


36  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

Our  first  doctrine  of  the  sacredness  of  each  unique  personality 
already  implies  that  each  man  must  respect  the  personality  of  the 
other.  If  a  conflict  of  interest  ensues,  an  adjustment  is  necessary 
which  will  consider  in  equal  measure  all  concerned,  and  which  will 
avoid  the  exploitation  of  the  one  at  the  expense  of  the  other.  In 
addition  to  this,  our  concept  of  interdependence  demands  from  the 
individual  the  responsibility  to  maintain  those  social  relations  and 
organizations  upon  which  his  welfare  rests.  To  know  that  every 
action  of  his  has  reference  to  other  persons  and  to  consider  the  effect 
of  his  activities  upon  the  social  institutions  is  a  duty  which  he  must 
fulfill  not  only  by  virtue  of  the  doctrine  of  the  inviolability  of  all 
persons,  but  also  because  natural  conditions  make  him  dependent 
upon  social  life  for  his  very  existence. 

It  will  be  realized  from  this  emphasis  placed  upon  socialization 
that  the  need  of  unique  evaluation  does  not  imply  selfishness  or  un- 
bridled individualism.  Undoubtedly  danger  lurks  in  the  overemphasis 
of  either  of  the  two  factors  to  the  exclusion  of  the  other — democracy 
is  a  balance  of  forces.  We  are  entering  upon  a  period  in  which 
socialization  will  for  the  time  being  be  considered  the  more  impor- 
tant factor  in  many  plans  of  economic  and  political  life.  The  change 
is  from  an  emphasis  upon  rights  to  emphasis  upon  duties.  Nor  are 
we  yet  ripe  for  that  exalted  conception  of  'mutual  aid' implied  in  the 
theory  of  Anarchy.  Evidently  since  all  individuals  have  not  ac- 
cepted the  responsibility  of  noblesse  oblige  involved  in  the  democratic 
doctrine  it  will  be  necessary  to  have  means  of  restraint  to  use  against 
those  who  would  attempt  to  violate  the  personalities  of  others. 
Furthermore,  the  relations  upon  which  we  are  dependent  are  far  from 
being  obvious.  It  has  taken  hundreds  of  generations  of  human  living 
to  fully  realize  many  of  them  and  it  may  take  a  lifetime  to  rediscover 
them.  Respect  for  social  institutions  and  obedience  to  them  until 
more  adequate  ones  can  be  established  will  follow  as  a  corollary  from 
a  realization  of  the  individual's  dependence  upon  social  life.  Here 
education  has  an  important  function  in  making  explicit  the  signifi- 
cance and  deep  roots  of  social  institutions.  Moreover,  since  the 
dependences  of  man  upon  other  men  and  upon  nature  are  not  of  a 
definite  and  limited  number  but  are  really  infinite,  always  multiplying 


THE   DOCTRINES   OF   DEMOCRACY  37 

in  number  and  increasing  in  complexity,  the  social  relation  cannot 
be  confined  only  to  adjustment  to  existing  institutions  and  traditions. 
Education  has  the  additional  function  of  extending  the  social  idea  in 
new  directions  to  apply  to  wider  and  more  complex  societies  and  to 
find  embodiment  in  new  and  more  highly  developed  institutions. 
The  process  of  socialization  is  never  complete.  In  no  sense  is  the 
individual  to  be  conceived  of  as  disparate,  a  law  unto  himself,  self- 
sustaining  and  self-sufficient;  at  every  point  it  will  be  seen  that  he 
must  reckon  with  other  forces  and  with  other  men,  and  with  his 
future  as  well. 

The  unification  of  the  individual  with  the  World  is  an  abiding 
thought  in  philosophy  and  religion.  The  longing  to  become  merged 
with  the  All,  to  save  oneself  from  the  loneliness  of  a  dissociated  life, 
is  at  the  heart  of  the  notion  of  Salvation.  The  quest  of  life  is  a  quest 
for  the  unification  of  the  individual  soul  with  the  soul  of  the  world. 
Born  from  the  World,  we  are  yet,  so  to  speak,  bound  by  an  umbilical 
cord  from  the  very  center  of  our  being  to  the  womb  of  Mother  Earth 
and  we  dare  not  break  the  bond  without  cutting  off  the  sustenance  of 
the  nourishing  mother. 

Differentiation,  a  separating  from  the  total  matrix,  never  means 
an  absolute  separation  from  the  body.  It  is  as  if  with  every  diver- 
sification the  bond  that  unifies  us  with  earth  undergoes  a  subdivision; 
a  new  finely  spun  thread  appears  with  each  differentiation.  Never  is 
the  individual  in  reality  cut  off  from  the  world  from  which  he  was 
born.  The  higher  the  differentiation,  the  more  numerous  are  the 
bonds,  the  more  finely  spun,  the  more  closely  interwoven;  they  cannot 
be  neglected  or  broken  without  hurt  to  the  being.  The  full  develop- 
ment of  our  personality  depends  upon  retaining  these  bonds  of  union 
between  our  differentiated  self  and  the  Universe. 

Our  new  outlook  has  not  suppressed  the  deep  human  longing 
for  unification  with  the  world;  but  the  conception  of  what  constitutes 
union  has  been  transformed.  In  the  philosophies  of  the  East  the 
unification  is  to  be  attained  by  merging  again  into  the  Infinite  from 
which  we  have  sprung.  Through  a  loss  of  consciousness  we  are  to 
be  unified  again  with  the  world  of  the  unconscious.  The  whole 
work  of  evolution  is  to  be  undone  and  the  self  is  to  lapse  again  into 


38  THEORIES   OF  AMERICANIZATION 

an  undifferentiated  state  of  unconsciousness.  In  accordance  with 
our  own  conception  a  complete  life  is  possible  neither  when  the  bonds 
are  broken  nor  when  they  are  merged  into  indiscrimination,  but  only 
when  the  Individual  becomes  conscious  of  the  myriad  relationships 
which  join  him  with  the  World.  The  union  of  the  self  with  the 
World  cannot  be  attained  by  falling  back  into  the  undifferentiated 
state,  by  going  back  into  the  womb,  as  it  were.  Once  born  we  must 
continue  to  grow,  that  is,  to  become  differentiated.  Only  one  process 
can  save  us.  We  must  become  conscious  of  the  bonds  that  hold  us 
to  the  world;  see  clearly  every  relationship;  discover  more  and 
more  how  we  are  bound  to  the  world.  Our  own  notion  of  evolution 
teaches  us  that  the  line  of  development  is  not  in  the  attainment  of 
homogeneous  undifferentiation,  but  of  integrated  diversifications; 
not  in  a  falling  back  to  unconsciousness,  but  in  the  attainment  of 
self-consciousness.  The  progress  of  our  salvation  is  in  the  continued 
differentiation  of  each  self  and  in  the  progressive,  conscious  realiza- 
tion of  the  bonds  of  union  that  the  differentiating  self  bears  to  the 
rest  of  the  world. 

To  regard  each  individual  as  an  end  in  himself;  to  know  that  he 
is  a  growing  organism  and  that  the  goal  of  his  Being  is  already  inherent 
in  his  instinctive  endowment;  to  understand  that  as  he  grows  he 
becomes  more  differentiated  from  his  fellows  and  yet  more  dependent 
upon  them;  to  realize  that  consciousness  of  himself  and  of  his  rela- 
tionships to  the  world  is  what  keeps  him  whole — all  these  are  of  the 
democratic  doctrine  which  looks  for  the  goal  of  the  world  not  in  the 
fulfillment  of  any  objective  law  or  principle,  but  within  man  himself 
to  the  fulfillment  of  his  Personality. 

In  the  endeavor  to  develop  Personality  three  conditions  must  be 
held  in  mind: 

1.  That  each  unique  individual  be  regarded  as  the  point  of  reference 

for  value; 

2.  That  the  environment  present  a  diversity  of  possibilities  accessible 

to  all; 

3.  That  there  be  a  consciousness  on  the  part  of  the  individual  of  his 

dependence  upon  the  intricate  series  of  natural  and  social 
relationships  upon  which  his  individuality  rests. 


THE   DOCTRINES   OF   DEMOCRACY  89 

Since  these  three  conditions  may  exist  in  an  infinite  variety  of  degrees, 
we  must  realize  that  democracy  is  no  one  definite  state  but  a  tendency 
of  development.  We  can,  therefore,  speak  of  democracy  only  in  com- 
parative terms.  It  is  the  direction  of  the  movement  which  will  define 
any  condition  as  democratic  or  not.  Where  there  is  a  progressive 
consideration  of  uniqueness,  a  multiplication  of  diverse  possibilities, 
a  growing  consciousness  of  man's  interdependence — there  does  democ- 
racy exist. 


DEMOCRACY  AND  MINORITIES 

Our  main  task,  that  of  applying  these  criteria  to  the  special  problem 
of  the  adjustment  of  foreign  ethnic  groups,  is  part  of  the  more  general 
question  of  the  democratic  treatment  of  minorities.  What  attitude 
should  a  Democracy  assume  toward  minority  divergences?  A  con- 
sideration of  this  question  will  serve  to  make  the  foregoing  analysis 
more  concrete  as  well  as  to  develop  some  important  notions  relevant 
to  the  subsequent  discussion. 

Democracy  has  often  been  completely  identified  in  practice  with 
the  rule  of  the  majority,  as  if  this  were  the  essence  of  our  principle 
and  not  merely  an  expedient.  Obviously,  once  admitting  the  correct- 
ness of  such  an  identification,  suppression  of  minorities  would  be  in 
thorough  accord  with  the  ideal  of  democracy,  even  its  avowed 
purpose,  and  not  an  evil  made  necessary  by  the  practical  limitations 
of  the  evolved  political  machinery.  If  the  presumption  is  that  the 
opinion  of  the  majority  and  the  right  are  one,  then  all  divergences 
from  the  majority  must  be  set  down  as  evil.  Our  own  basic  prin- 
ciple, however,  it  will  be  recalled,  demands  that  we  tend  to  regard 
all  things  as  good ;  suppressing  alone  is  evil  and  can  be  justified  only 
when  it  becomes  necessary  to  avoid  a  worse  evil.  In  accordance  with 
our  own  notion  divergences  must  be  regarded  as  good  until  they  are 
shown  to  be  evil  and  must  be  permitted  to  exist  until  the  effects  of 
their  activities  are  evidently  detrimental. 

Nevertheless,  a  tolerant  attitude  towards  minority  views  and 
policies  does  not  leave  us  without  any  criterion  for  judging  when  they 


40  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

should  be  suppressed.  Too  often  an  artificial  dilemma  is  proposed 
to  choose  between  rule  in  accordance  with  the  majority  or  license  for 
minorities  to  do  anything  they  please.  Such  a  Hobson's  choice  is 
quite  unnecessary.  As  is  usually  the  case  the  dilemma  is  to  be  solved 
by  analyzing  other  possible  positions  and  by  the  introduction  of 
qualifications.  Minority  divergences  are  not  of  one  kind  and  any 
wholesale  statement  in  reference  to  them  is  bound  to  mislead.  For 
the  purposes  of  our  own  discussion  we  may  divide  them  into  at  least 
three  broad  classes. 

CRUCIAL  IMPORT 

In  the  first  class  are  the  divergences  which  are  not  really  crucial. 
Whether  a  person  prefers  greys  or  browns,  whether  he  likes  fish  or 
fowl,  whether  he  favors  Shakespeare  or  Shaw,  would  not,  generally 
speaking,  be  matters  of  great  concern  to  the  state.  Perhaps  in  dis- 
cussing divergences  we  do  not  usually  have  such  differences  in  mind. 
Yet  it  is  of  prime  importance  to  remember  constantly  that  there  is 
such  a  class.  If  we  stop  to  think  for  a  moment  we  shall  admit  that 
more  matters  than  we  commonly  assume  really  fall  in  this  class; 
perhaps  it  is  the  largest  class.  There  is  a  tendency — so  universal 
as  to  lead  to  a  suspicion  that  it  may  be  instinctive — to  regard  dif- 
ferences from  the  majority  or  from  the  established  order  or  from  the 
conventional  as  being  inferior.  To  remember  that  there  is  a  vast 
class  of  differences  which  really  do  not  matter  will  certainly  serve  to 
improve  our  sense  of  humor  and  our  spirit  of  tolerance. 

OBJECTIVITY 

On  the  other  hand  there  is  a  class  of  divergence  which  can  be 
objectively  demonstrated  to  be  malignant.  By  an  objective  demon- 
stration we  mean  one  that  would  repeatedly  convince  men  regardless 
of  their  race,  creed,  occupation  or  personal  idiosyncrasies  provided 
they  were  open-minded.  Science  tends  to  deal  with  such  matters 
as  are  capable  of  such  experimental  objective  verification.  When- 
ever we  know  through  scientific  research  that  a  certain  condition  is 
harmful,  then  the  opinion  of  a  contrary-minded  minority  need  not  be 


THE   DOCTRINES   OF   DEMOCRACY  41 

respected.  There  is  a  range  of  matters  where  such  scientific  conclu- 
sions are  possible  and  generally  accepted.  Sanitation,  for  instance, 
calculated  to  safeguard  the  health  of  all  regardless  of  creed,  politics 
or  nationality  may  be  enforced  even  against  the  unwillingness  of  the 
unclean. 

Academically  it  is  possible  of  course  to  controvert  this  argument 
of  objectivity  by  showing  that  objectivity  is  relative,  not  absolute. 
Whether  a  certain  condition  is  really  evil  or  not,  it  may  be  said, 
depends  not  only  upon  demonstration  that  it  exists  but  upon  a  certain 
assumption  of  aims.  If  trance  states  and  the  seeing  of  visions  are 
considered  as  in  themselves  good,  starvation  which  may  promote 
these  abnornmal  conditions  may  be  transvaluated  into  goods.  But 
we  are  not  pursuing  hairsplitting  discussions  for  their  own  sake. 
Common  sense  will  pragmatically  accept  the  principle  that  in  matters 
such  as  these  there  is  no  justifiable  right  to  differ  and  no  society  will 
encounter  any  very  great  trouble  in  suppressing  activities  which 
scientific  investigation  concludes  to  be  harmful  for  the  human  race 
as  a  whole.  We  may  lay  down  the  principle  that  in  the  degree  that  a 
demonstration  of  the  evil  results  of  a  minority  opinion  approaches 
objectivity,  in  that  degree  is  it  democratic  to  suppress  the  diverging 
opinion. 

Approaching  the  possibility  of  objective  demonstration  as  a  limit 
is  a  whole  range  of  actions  universally  acknowledged  to  be  evil. 
Here,  too,  drastic  action  is  justifiable.  Such  matters  as  stealing, 
lying,  adultery,  against  which  there  is  a  deep  laid  and  universally 
widespread  antipathy,  may  be  forcibly  suppressed  without  violating 
our  sense  of  democracy.  For  even  those  who  commit  these  sins 
will  in  moments  when  they  are  not  engaged  in  the  action  admit 
that  these  are  wrong  in  principle.  The  particular  offensive  action 
may  be  excused  as  necessitated  by  circumstances  or  as  really  not 
falling  within  the  sphere  of  the  rule  broken;  but  the  principle  would 
be  defended  by  all,  even  the  doers  of  the  mischievous  deed. 

Of  the  same  temper  as  the  objectively  demonstrable  and  of  the 
universally  approved  or  disapproved  is  a  range  of  matters  capable  of 
rational  demonstration.  Rational  justification  is  really  an  extension 
of  the  two  former  positions.  Through  reasoning  we  show  that  the 


42  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

situation  under  discussion  is  really  another  instance  of  a  position 
already  assumed  to  be  covered,  where  the  same  principle  must  apply. 
In  the  degree,  therefore,  that  we  attempt  to  reach  rational  conclusions 
we  are  approaching  a  democratic  attitude.  In  essence,  summarizing 
the  three  divisions  of  this  second  class,  objectivity  of  judgment  rather 
than  majority  of  judgment  is  the  goal  toward  which  democracy  tends. 
No  majority  rule  should  stand  in  the  way  of  a  position  objectively 
or  rationally  demonstrable  to  be  salutary,  even  in  a  democracy. 
Needless  to  say,  neither  has  a  minority  in  such  a  case  a  right  to  retain 
its  private  point  of  view. 

SOCIAL  INTENT 

However,  in  the  discussion  of  the  treatment  of  minorities  we 
generally  have  in  mind  not  divergences  which  do  not  matter  or  those 
where  there  is  a  universal  accord,  but  divergences  which  are  of 
import  and  in  reference  to  which  there  is  a  difference  of  opinion. 
This  third  class  refers  especially  to  those  positions  where  the  minority 
avows  its  social-mindedness,  claims  to  be  acting  for  the  general  good, 
but  differs  from  the  majority  in  its  opinion  of  the  proper  means. 
It  is  the  treatment  of  these  instances  which  will  be  the  test  of 
whether  democracy  exists  in  a  situation  or  not. 

In  these  cases  the  plain  rule  of  democracy  is  to  strive  toward 
tolerance;  to  permit  the  minority  to  be  active  even  to  the  point  of 
exasperation.  It  will  be  necessary  to  reckon  carefully  how  crucial 
the  situation  is.  When  it  is  a  case  of  survival  or  destruction,  there  is 
no  other  way  but  to  fall  back  upon  prejudice.  The  retreat  from 
tolerance,  however,  must  be  with  the  face  toward  the  unattainable 
position.  Where  objective  proof  is  impossible,  let  us  have  a  repre- 
sentative majority  decision;  where  the  majority  cannot  be  trusted, 
we  must  as  a  last  resort  entrench  ourselves  in  rash  guesses,  in  pre- 
judices, in  instinct.  But  then  democracy  has  been  defeated.  How- 
ever, in  less  crucial  situations  democracy  demands  that  we  wait  for 
the  demonstrably  evil  results  before  we  suppress.  If  the  situation 
is  really  bad,  the  evil  results  will  soon  be  seen.  Suppression  of 
minority  views  in  situations  where  such  suppression  is  not  absolutely 
necessary  is  the  antithesis  of  democracy. 


THE   DOCTRINES   OF  DEMOCRACY  43 

In  dealing  with  minorities  it  is  necessary  to  make  a  serious  intel- 
lectual attempt  to  classify  the  divergence  under  consideration  with 
reference  to  its  crucial  import,  to  its  social  intent,  to  the  objective 
demonstrability  of  the  quality  of  its  effect,  and  to  decide  upon  the 
degree  of  tolerance  to  be  accorded  from  its  relation  to  these  standards, 
endeavoring  always  to  afford  the  greatest  freedom  compatible  with 
the  protection  of  all  other  freedoms.  The  application  of  these 
criteria  demands  knowledge,  skill  and  good  judgment;  their  analysis 
alone  does  not  guarantee  a  correct  application.  Nevertheless,  an 
earnest  attempt  to  use  them  as  guides  will  lead  us  out  of  the  artificial 
dilemma  of  choice  between  the  license  of  the  majority  and  the  license 
of  the  minority.  The  application  of  the  rules  laid  down  may  serve 
as  aids  and  as  sanctions  for  our  action. 

The  suppression  of  free  speech,  for  instance,  on  the  part  of  organs 
that  were  frankly  opposed  to  the  war  would  be  seen  from  such  a 
criterion  to  have  been  undemocratic.  It  would  argue  a  great  weak- 
ness in  our  cause  and  methods  if  a  minority  press,  in  spite  of  an 
overwhelming  majority  of  pro-war  opinion,  could  have  influenced 
our  mind  to  stray  from  the  righteous  cause.  Reasoning  about  it, 
the  chances  are  that  a  complete  freedom  would  have  redounded  to 
the  support  of  the  majority  idea.  Suppression  constantly  adds  to 
a  bitterness  that  would  be  alleviated  by  talking.  There  is  an  insinua- 
tion that  the  arguments  hidden  are  very  powerful  when  in  reality 
the  mere  statement  of  them  might  be  their  own  refutation.  Similarly 
no  one  would  seriously  maintain  that  humane  treatment  of  conscien- 
tious objectors  even  in  the  apparently  few  doubtful  cases  would  have 
led  to  an  appreciable  increase  of  those  who  feared  possible  death  more 
than  sure  disgrace  and  cowardice.  That  would,  indeed,  be  a  frank 
admission  of  the  lack  of  patriotism  among  the  many  or  of  the  worth- 
lessness  of  our  cause.  The  arbitrary  methods  in  both  instances 
must  be  attributed  not  to  the  reasonable  needs  of  democracy,  but 
rather  to  the  stupidity  that  comes  with  states  of  high  emotional 
excitement.  In  the  degree  that  an  evil  has  been  inflicted  unneces- 
sarily on  divergent  minorities  such  mode  of  action  must  be  regarded 
as  undemocratic. 

But  even  when  the  objective  consideration  leads  to  the  conclusion 


44  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

that  the  minority  is  in  the  wrong  and  must  not  be  permitted  to  continue 
a  certain  activity,  suppression  by  means  of  force  should  be  avoided 
wherever  possible.  Coercion  is  the  antithesis  of  everything  demo- 
cratic; it  imposes  an  external  will  upon  the  subject;  it  acts  always 
by  limiting  the  alternative  possibilities;  it  leaves  no  room  for  the 
development  of  that  feeling  of  responsibility  which  is  the  sine  qua 
non  of  a  moral  life.  Democracy's  method  is  the  word,  not  the  whip. 
The  means  of  social  control  in  a  free  state  is  education — the  bringing 
of  people  together  into  communication,  a  free  press,  free  speech, 
free  schools,  the  dissemination  of  knowledge, — these  are  the  means  of 
influence  that  a  democracy  should  use  in  an  endeavor  to  convince  of 
what  is  reasonable.  Whenever  it  is  necessary  to  substitute  some  kind 
of  physical  force  for  mental  persuasion,  some  element  of  democracy 
has  somewhere  been  left  unfulfilled  either  on  the  part  of  the  subject 
(who  may  not  be  reasonable  enough)  against  whom  it  is  exercised,  or, 
more  often,  on  the  part  of  the  agent  exercising  it.  Whenever  it  is 
possible  to  use  any  other  method,  the  use  of  force  becomes  reprehensi- 
ble in  a  democracy.  It  can  only  be  justified  as  a  lesser  evil.  "Force 
without  stint"  is  the  last  resort  when  every  other  method  has  proved 
unavailing.  Democracy  exists  in  any  situation  to  the  extent  that 
force  is  unnecessary.  When  we  speak  of  the  recent  war  as  a  demo- 
cratic war,  and  the  incidental  activities,  such  as  the  draft,  the  limita- 
tion of  free  speech  and  free  press,  the  curtailment  of  freedom  for  those 
who  happened  technically  to  be  enemy  aliens,  as  being  democratic 
in  their  nature,  we  are  in  reality  not  saying  what  we  mean.  These 
activities  had  to  be  carried  on,  not  because  they  were  democratic, 
but  because  external  conditions  made  democracy  impossible  within; 
i.e.,  because  the  world  is  not  yet  safe  for  democracy. 

This  basic  notion  of  tolerance,  with  its  implication  of  the  need  of 
objective  demonstration,  of  careful  judgment,  of  reluctance  to  use 
coercive  methods,  gives  the  keynote  of  the  treatment  in  the  following 
chapters  which  deal  with  the  place  of  ethnic  minorities  hi  the  state. 
As  civilization  grows  more  mature — as  in  the  life  of  the  individual — 
a  realization  comes  upon  us  that  we  can  afford  to  be  far  more  tolerant 
than  we  ever  imagined  without  really  disturbing  anything  vital,  and 
even  with  greater  chance  for  success  and  happiness.  Toward  our 


THE   DOCTRINES   OF   DEMOCRACY  45 

individual  likes,  toward  our  children,  our  wives,  OUT  neighbors, 
toward  our  own  actions,  those  of  our  friends  and  even  of  our  enemies, 
a  liberality  of  spirit  is  the  only  possibly  justifiable  rule  of  life.  This 
enlightened  confidence  in  the  good  of  divergence  rather  than  the 
primitive  suspicion  of  differences  is  the  temper  with  which  it  is  neces- 
sary that  we  approach  the  problem  of  the  relation  of  ethnic  minorities 
to  the  state. 


THEORIES  OF  ETHNIC  ADJUSTMENT 


CHAPTER  II 
THEORIES  OF  ETHNIC  ADJUSTMENT 


INTRODUCTORY: 
THE  JEWS — A  MINORITY  ETHNIC  COMMUNITY 

In  discussing  the  place  of  the  Jewish  group1  in  America  we  are  deal- 
ing with  one  particular  kind  of  minority  divergence.  The  question 
is  not  merely  one  of  homogeneity  vs.  heterogeneity,  as  is  often  implic- 
itly assumed  in  such  discussions,  and  our  problem  cannot  be  so  easily 
disposed  of  by  pointing  out  that  divergences  are  necessary  for  prog- 
ress. Even  within  the  homogeneous  nation  differences  of  individual 
character  and  intelligence,  of  locality,  of  economic  conditions,  of 
political  affiliation,  of  education,  will  lead  to  a  diversified  opinion 
in  reference  to  the  important  political,  industrial,  educational,  social 
and  moral  problems  of  the  day.  The  question  before  us  relates  not 
to  differentiation  as  such,  but  rather  to  the  particular  kind  of  differen- 
tiation due  to  the  retention  of  ethnic  loyalties.  The  problem  that 
faces  us  is  whether  ethnic  distinctions  are  to  be  tolerated  in  America. 

The  supreme  difference  from  our  point  of  view  between  the  ethnic 

*In  speaking  of  the  Jewish  group  as  an  entity,  one  must  be  warned  against  conceiv- 
ing the  Jewish  unity  as  homogeneous  or  compact — a  frequent  error  among  those  who 
do  not  know  the  Jews  intimately.  From  any  point  of  view  that  one  might  measure 
the  Jews,  their  economic  or  social  status,  synagogue  affiliation,  attitude  toward 
religious,  educational,  social  problems  and  even  toward  the  important  question  of  the 
perpetuation  of  their  own  group  identity,  a  great  range  of  divergences  will  be  found. 
Even  the  purity  of  the  race  so  often  taken  for  granted  may  be  questioned.  Far  from 
being  closely  welded  together,  they  have  no  central  organization,  and  no  ecclesiastical 
unity.  There  are,  indeed,  many  examples  of  coordinated  activities,  such  as  the  federa- 
tions of  charities;  and  there  are  certain  bodies  of  national  scope,  like  the  American 
Jewish  Committee,  the  Joint  Distribution  Committee,  and  the  Zionist  Organization  of 
America.  Such  unified  activities,  however,  represent  voluntary  attempts  at  cen- 
tralization and  cooperation  for  specific  purposes  and  are  for  the  most  part  recognition 
of  the  superior  efficiency  of  coordinated  effort.  These  societies  have  no  official  or 
authoritative  power  such  as  a  government  or  a  church  organization  might  have.  The 
Kehillah  (Jewish  Community)  of  New  York  City  is  an  attempt  to  organize  New  York 
Jewry  so  that  there  may  be  the  machinery  to  evolve  a  representative  public  opinion 

49 


50  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

group  and  the  other  classifications  such  as  political  parties,  economic 
classes,  geographic  sections,  mentioned  in  the  previous  paragraph, 
is  that  the  former  is  foreign  and  the  latter  are  indigenous.  These 
ethnic  distinctions — Jew,  Italian,  Pole — were  formed  under  the 
conditions  of  other  times  and  other  places.  Shall  these  associations 
made  in  the  past  and  in  other  territories  persist  to-day  and  into  the 
future  in  the  new  geographic  area  and  under  the  new  governmental 
unity;  or  shall  all  groupings  within  the  nation  be  the  result  of  condi- 
tions in  our  own  country  and  of  the  present  period?  Further,  if 
these  foreign  groups  are  to  persist,  under  what  limitations  may  they 
do  so?  How  shall  we  answer  these  questions  in  the  light  of  the 
principles  formulated  in  the  first  chapter? 

Although  our  main  interest  centers  about  the  Jewish  group,  what- 
ever is  said  in  the  following  pages  concerning  the  fundamental 
method  of  adjustment  is  meant  to  apply  equally  to  any  ethnic  minor- 
ity in  America  which  is  desirous  of  maintaining  its  group  identity. 
Great  care  will  need  to  be  observed,  however,  in  applying  the  main 
principles  to  take  into  consideration  the  differences  between  one  group 
and  another  and  to  introduce  the  relevant  qualifications.  For 
instance,  the  fact  that  political  allegiance  has  been  an  important 
element  in  the  German's  ethnic  loyalty — at  least  until  very  recently — 
while  it  is  negligible  in  the  case  of  the  Jew,  suggests  immediately 
that  the  practical  application  will  be  limited  by  practical  differences. 
Nevertheless,  general  principles  there  are  and  the  manner  of  adjust- 
ment proposed  for  the  Jewish  group  as  harmonious  with  the  demo- 
cratic conception  is  considered  as  an  example  of,  not  an  exception 
to,  a  general  mode  of  assimilation. 

In  treating  of  the  Jews  as  a  foreign  ethnic  group  coordinate  with 
other  immigrant  national  groups  such  as  the  Italians  or  the  Poles, 

that  could  make  itself  felt  upon  all  general  Jewish  problems.  Although  the  form  of 
the  organization  already  exists  and  a  certain  amount  of  good  work  has  been  done 
through  it  during  the  last  ten  years  since  its  inception,  its  aim  to  become  a  body 
recognized  by  the  Jews  as  representative  of  the  community  as  a  whole  is  far  from  being 
an  accomplishment.  Underlying  this  disunity  and  heterogeneity,  however,  it  is 
undoubtedly  true  that  there  exists  a  certain  unity  of  consciousness,  perhaps  almost  a 
feeling  of  family  kinship.  This  is  well  evidenced  in  a  number  of  striking  ways:  for 
instance,  the  tendency  to  marry  within  the  group;  to  become  awakened  in  the  face  of 
what  may  be  regarded  as  common  dangers,  pogroms,  blood  accusations,  slander  of 
the  Jewish  name;  to  organize  readily  for  the  relief  of  Jewish  suffering. 


THEORIES   OF   ETHNIC   ADJUSTMENT  51 

the  writer  has  not  failed  to  realize  that  some  objections  might  be 
raised  against  such  a  classification.  It  may  be  that  all  Jews  are  not 
immigrant  in  the  same  sense  of  the  word.  In  addition  to  the  interest- 
ing but  incidental  fact  that  the  Jews  played  an  important  part  in  the 
discovery  of  America  and  that  the  first  white  man  who  set  foot  on  the 
soil  of  the  New  World  was  in  all  likelihood  a  Jew,  it  is  true  that  the 
settlement  of  Jews  in  America  dates  from  the  earliest  period.1  There 
have  been  three  important  migrations  of  Jews,  the  Spanish  Portu- 
guese up  to  the  close  of  the  eighteenth  century,  the  German  Jews  from 
1772-1870,  the  Eastern  European  Jew1  from  1881-1914.  Jews 
played  an  important  part  in  the  War  of  the  Revolution  and  fought 
on  both  sides  during  the  Civil  War.2  Therefore,  some  Jews  residing 
in  America  are  native  in  any  sense  that  the  term  might  be  used  of 
white  men  in  America.  On  the  other  hand,  of  the  three  million 
Jews3  living  in  America  over  85  per  cent  are  either  recent  immigrants 
of  the  'new'  migration  or  the  children  of  such  immigrants.  These 
are  the  so-called  Yiddish-speaking  Jews4  who  hail  from  Russia, 
Poland  and  Galicia.  These  Eastern  European  Jews,  who  are  thus 
the  overwhelming  majority,  present  the  crucial  problem  of  adjust- 
ment, for  the  Jews  of  the  older  migrations  have  through  inter- 
marriage and  through  complete  taking  over  of  the  customs  of  the 
land  (with  the  exception  sometimes  of  a  formal  religious  adherence) 
so  adjusted  themselves  that  the  divergence  between  them  and  the 
general  population  is  hardly  to  be  noted.  It  is  the  Russian  Jew  who 
particularly  impresses  himself  as  a  Jew.  Coming  as  he  does  from  the 
ghetto,  he  comes  from  a  milieu  as  distinctly  Jewish  as  the  social  con- 
ditions from  which  the  Italian  hails  are  distinctly  Italian.  He  pre- 
sents a  type  diverging  from  the  American  in  physique  and  personal 
habits;  he  is  unacquainted  with  English  and  with  the  law  and  usages 
of  the  new  country.  He  presents  a  problem  of  Americanization  simi- 
lar to  that  presented  by  an  Italian,  a  Pole,  or  a  Czech.  Moreover, 
he  has  lived  under  the  influence  of  the  development  of  the  national 
movement  and  the  renascence  of  Hebrew  literature,  which  has  inbred 

1Article,  "United  States,"  in  the  Jewish  Encyclopedia. 
2Peter  Wiernik,  The  Jews  in  America. 
3The  American  Jewish  Year  Book,  1919-1920. 

*i.e.,  Jews  who  can  speak  or  understand  Yiddish.     In  the  second  generation  they 
usually  speak  English. 


52  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

him  with  a  national  consciousness.  The  numerical  strength  of  the 
recent  migration,  furthermore,  is  of  great  influence  in  aiding  to  keep 
alive  the  group  spirit.  It  is,  therefore,  the  Eastern  European  Jew 
of  the  recent  immigration  who  presents  by  his  peculiar  characteristics 
and  his  highly  developed  national  and  cultural  consciousness  the 
problem  of  adjustment  which  faces  us  and  gives  to  our  question  also 
the  character  of  a  problem  of  assimilation. 

In  the  second  place  the  Jew  does  not  owe  an  allegiance  to  the 
nation  from  which  he  has  emigrated  in  the  same  way  that  a  German 
or  an  Italian  might;  the  Jews  do  not  come  from  their  own  land. 
This  does  away  in  a  measure  with  the  apprehension  of  a  double 
political  allegiance.  Like  the  Pole,  however,  he  has  a  potential 
double  political  loyalty,  in  the  event  that  a  Jewish  state  be  reestab- 
lished in  Palestine.1  Here,  too,  there  is  a  qualification.  The  Polish 
State  was  destroyed  only  in  comparatively  recent  times,  and  most 
Poles  who  live  here  were  born  on  Polish  soil.  It  is  two  thousand 
years  since  the  Jews  have  had  a  state,  and  the  Jews  that  we  have  in 
mind  were  born  on  other  than  Palestinian  soil.  Since  there  are 
fifteen  million  Jews,  and  Palestine  can  accommodate  only  three  mil- 
lion, the  mass  of  Jews  living  in  America  will  never  experience  a  double 
political  allegiance.  Moreover,  the  Palestinian  State  will  in  all 
likelihood  be  reestablished  under  conditions  which  will  make  the 
question  of  a  double  political  allegiance  academic.  However,  in 
spite  of  the  improbability  that  the  Jews  will  ever  be  involved  in  a 
dual  political  allegiance,  a  discussion  which  would  neglect  even  this 
possibility  would  hardly  deserve  to  be  considered  as  adequate.2 

To  treat  the  Jews  as  forming  a  religious  group  parallel  with  Protest- 
ants and  Catholics  would  certainly  not  be  sufficient.  Even  in  the 
case  of  many  other  nationalities  it  would  be  a  mistake  to  fail  to 
recognize  that  religion  plays  a  large  part  and  is  often  synonymous 
with  the  national  spirit.  Yet  in  no  case  is  religion  coextensive  with 
nationality  as  in  the  case  of  the  Jews.  While  all  Poles  are  Catholics, 
not  all  Catholics  are  Poles.  There  are  very  few  Jews,  however,  who 

lThis  sentence,  as  well  as  most  of  this  book,  was  written  prior  to  or  during  the 
Peace  Conference. 
*SeeChap.  V. 


THEORIES   OF   ETHNIC   ADJUSTMENT  55 

are  not  Jews  by  birth;  and  Jews  by  birth  even  when  they  are  not 
positively  affiliated  with  any  synagogue  are  seldom  professedly 
members  of  any  other  religious  denomination.  The  intimate  con- 
nection between  ethnos  and  religion  in  the  Jewish  group  will  not  be 
without  its  effect  upon  the  discussion  of  our  problem.  However,  to 
consider  the  Jews  as  forming  only  a  church  would  conceal  the  funda- 
mental issue  in  our  problem. 

Such  procedure  would  fail  to  take  into  consideration  what  is  of 
most  importance  to  hold  in  mind,  that  we  are  dealing  with  a  com- 
munity of  men  who  have  characteristics  diverging  from  the  general 
population,  not  merely  with  divergent  doctrines.  The  Jews  have  an 
identity  of  race,  a  community  in  history,  social  traditions,  religion, 
language  and  literature,  a  consciousness  of  these  common  possessions 
and  a  hope  and  possibility  of  being  reestablished  as  a  nationality  in 
Palestine.1  Our  problem  rises  from  the  desire  of  the  Jews  to  maintain 
their  identity  and  to  live  the  life  of  Jews  in  the  midst  of  the  social 
conditions  of  a  divergent  environment. 

Although  the  purpose  is  to  propose  a  solution  to  this  problem 
harmonious  with  principle,  the  plan  must  be  more  than  a  theoretical 
conception.  We  are  confronted  with  a  practical  need,  not  merely 
with  an  academic  issue.  An  analysis  will  be  made  of  the  various 
types  of  adjustment  already  suggested  in  current  practice  and 
literature  with  the  view  of  determining  which  of  these  will  fulfill 
hi  the  greatest  possible  degree  the  demands  of  our  democratic  criteria. 
This  method  is  in  agreement  with  the  attitude  that  looks  upon 
democracy  as  relative.  We  must  accept  the  adjustment  that  has  a 
possibility  of  being  translated  into  a  realizable  program.  No 
"counsel  of  social  perfection"  is  premeditated,  but  a  plan  which  with 
full  regard  for  the  circumstances  and  conditions  recommends  itself 
as  a  liberal  solution. 

The  modes  of  adjustment  are  usually  in  these  discussions  pictured 
as  representing  two  possibilities :  either  total  assimilation  or  complete 
retention  of  the  group  identity.  Such  a  broad  division  suggests  the 

*It  has  been  frequently  pointed  out  that  the  consciousness  of  race  and  ethnic  unity 
is  more  important  than  actual  identity.  The  psychological  force  is  what  motivates. 
Thus  the  purity  of  race  may  not  be  actual,  but  merely  assumed;  the  language  may  be 
spoken  or  merely  waiting  to  be  revived;  the  land  may  be  possessed  or  merely  loved. 


54  THEORIES   OF  AMERICANIZATION 

vital  issues  involved.  Nevertheless,  it  leaves  room  for  so  many 
unanswered  questions  and  disturbing  implications  as  to  make  discus- 
sion unprofitable.  A  closer  examination  of  current  thought  and 
practice  will  reveal  that  there  are  at  least  four  possible  broad  methods 
of  adjustment,  two  which  look  toward  absorption  and  two  which  in 
some  form  or  other  provide  for  the  perpetuation  of  the  individuality 
of  the  ethnic  group.  The  analysis  into  four  instead  of  two  theories 
is  important;  it  serves  to  make  clear  the  objections  and  limitations 
which  are  obscured  by  the  more  general  treatment.  Too  often  each 
position  fixes  its  attention  and  bases  its  opposition  on  those  considera- 
tions which  the  other  side  would  immediately  concede  were  they 
presented  unequivocally.  The  juxtaposition  of  the  several  possible 
modes  of  adjustment  will  bring  out  clearly  the  issues  really  at  stake 
and  narrow  down  the  discussion  to  the  questions  which  are  in  fact 
relevant.  The  carelessness  in  the  analysis  of  the  question  has  been 
in  a  great  measure  an  obstruction  to  a  satisfactory  solution  of  this 
intricate  problem.  What  is  necessary  in  order  to  reach  an  acceptable 
settlement  is  not  so  much  persuasive  arguments  calculated  to  induce 
a  change  of  heart  as  a  more  discriminating  treatment  that  will  show 
what  is  as  well  as  what  is  not  involved. 

The  four  theories  the  criticism  of  which  will  constitute  the  analysis 
of  our  problem  are  (a)  the  'Americanization'  Theory;  (b)  the  'Melting 
Pot'  Theory;  (c)  the  'Federation  of  Nationalities'  Theory;  (d)  the 
'Community'  Theory.  The  names  with  which  the  theories  presented 
have  been  captioned  are  phrases  of  common  usage  chosen  because  they 
immediately  suggest  the  central  tendency  if  not  all  the  implications. 
Indeed,  it  may  at  times  seem  that  the  interpretation  is  too  strictly 
literal  and  the  proponents  of  a  certain  theory  may  claim  that  they 
never  meant  to  imply  so  much.  The  actual  number  of  theories  no 
doubt  is  equal  to  the  various  modes  of  procedure  and  there  are  times 
when  it  would  be  difficult  to  classify  any  particular  instance  definitely 
within  one  class.  Obviously,  however,  the  very  purpose  of  formula- 
tion is  to  bring  distinctions  into  clear  relief  and  to  make  explicit 
considerations  which  are  usually  forgotten  or  underemphasized. 

The  present  chapter  will  deal  with  the  first  three  of  the  theories — 
with  those  which  are  considered  inadequate  from  the  point  of  view 


THEORIES   OF   ETHNIC    ADJUSTMENT  55 

of  the  principles  developed  in  the  foregoing  analysis  of  democracy. 
The  'Community'  theory  and  its  implications  will  receive  separate 
consideration  in  Chapter  III. 

II 

THE  'AMERICANIZATION'  THEORY* 

According  to  this  position  America  is  pictured  as  already  populated 
with  a  fairly  homogeneous  type,  which  both  in  race  and  culture  has 
Anglo-Saxon  affiliations.  Even  if  these,  say  the  proponents  of  this 
theory,  who  are  conceived  to  be  the  'real'  Americans  are  not  actually 
in  numerical  majority,  their  type  ought  to  prevail  nevertheless. 
The  main  point  is  that  all  newcomers  from  foreign  lands  must  as 
quickly  as  possible  divest  themselves  of  their  old  characteristics,  and 
through  intermarriage  and  complete  taking  over  of  the  language 
customs,  hopes,  aspirations  of  the  American  type  obliterate  all  ethnic 
distinctions.  They  must  utterly  forget  the  land  of  their  birth  and 
completely  lose  from  their  memory  all  recollection  of  its  traditions 
in  a  single-minded  adherence  to  American  life  in  all  its  aspects. 
The  kind  of  life  proper  for  America  is  regarded  as  a  matter  to  be 
decided  altogether  by  the  Anglo-Saxon  and  by  those  who  have  be- 
come assimilated.2  The  foreigners  must  mould  themselves  into  the 
ready-made  form.  They  must  do  all  the  changing;  the  situation  is 
not  to  be  changed  by  them. 

This  point  of  view  is  often  illustrated  in  the  attitude  toward  what 
is  called  the  'new'  immigration.  In  the  'old'  immigration  from  1820 
to  1880,  the  North  Europeans  predominated.  It  was  made  up  mainly 
of  Swedes,  Norwegians,  English,  Irish,  Scotch,  and  Germans.  This 
immigration  is  in  current  text-books  regarded  as  superior  because  the 
immigrants  approximate  in  physical  type  the  early  American  pioneers 

JFor  writings  which  exemplify  this  attitude  wholly  or  in  part,  see  Ross,  The  Old 
World  in  the  New;  Grant,  The  Passing  of  the  Great  Race;  Woodruff,  The  Expansion  of 
Races;  Brandt,  Anglo-Saxon  Supremacy. 

2Of  course,  it  is  not  only  those  of  Anglo-Saxon  lineage  that  hold  to  this  theory; 
one  is  as  like  as  not  to  find  those  whose  families  have  lived  longest  in  America 
liberal  toward  the  foreigners.  Indeed,  it  very  often  happens  that  an  insistence 
Upon  complete  obliteration  of  foreign  characteristics  comes  from  those  who  have  been 
Americanized  comparatively  recently  and  who,  not  being  so  sure  of  themselves,  perhaps, 
must  necessarily  demonstrate  their  Americanism. 


56  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

and  show  in  language  and  culture  a  close  kinship.  On  the  other  hand 
the  new  immigration  since  1880,  of  Southern  and  Eastern  Europeans, 
is  regarded  as  inferior  and  even  dangerous,  on  account  of  the  diver- 
gence from  the  stocks  of  the  older  immigrants.  These  latter  are 
brachycephalic,  small  in  stature,  dark-eyed  and  dark-haired,  and 
odious  comparisons  are  drawn  with  the  northerners,  who  tend  to  be 
dolichocephalic,  tall,  blue-eyed,  and  fair-haired.  Virtue  and  the  good 
are  seen  to  be  in  direct  relation  to  the  type  represented  by  the  origi- 
nal pioneers,  and  divergence  from  this  fixed  standard  is  conceived  of 
as  an  inferiority. 

So  untrue  to  the  facts  and  so  inconsistent  with  the  spirit  of  democ- 
racy does  such  a  scheme  of  'Americanization'  seem  to  the  reason- 
able mind  that  the  question  may  be  raised  whether  such  an  idea  is 
really  anywhere  entertained;  whether  in  reality  it  is  not  an  exag- 
gerated statement  of  a  very  reasonable  demand  to  have  the  foreigner 
acquaint  himself  with  the  existing  American  institutions  and  adjust 
himself  to  the  new  life  with  a  regard  for  the  purposes  and  ideas  of  the 
American  people.  Unfortunately,  however,  the  opposite  is  rather  the 
case.  'Americanization,'  in  the  sense  defined  here,  is  the  accepted 
current  theory  and  practice  so  far  as  most  of  the  important  agencies 
dealing  with  this  problem  are  concerned,  and  it  is  to  be  feared  that 
with  the  intensification  of  feeling  resulting  from  the  war  this  tendency 
will  receive  an  added  impetus.  The  following  instances  will  perhaps 
suffice  to  show  that  the  foregoing  is  no  mere  academic  analysis. 

Most  striking  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  particular  problem 
before  us,  the  task  of  assimilating  the  Jew,  is  the  work  of  the  Educa- 
tional Alliance,  the  largest  Jewish  social  settlement  in  this  country. 
It  was  founded  over  twenty-five  years  ago  and  was  one  of  the  first 
to  recognize  the  importance  of  the  problem  of  the  adjustment  of  the 
immigrant  to  the  new  life  in  America.  Situated  in  the  heart  of  the 
East  Side,  in  the  midst  of  a  district  densely  populated  with  immigrant 
Jews,  it  conceived  its  problem  to  be  the  complete  de-orientalization 
of  the  Russian  Jew,  the  ironing  out  of  all  those  characteristics  which 
stamped  him  a  foreigner.  Although  the  neighborhood  in  which  it  is 
situated  is  the  centre  of  the  'intelligentsia'  of  the  ghetto,  and  repre- 
sents in  many  ways  a  high  status  of  literary  culture,  the  Alliance 


THEORIES   OF    ETHNIC    ADJUSTMENT  57 

has  remained  completely  oblivious  to  the  possibilities  of  cultural 
and  spiritual  contribution  inherent  in  the  life  of  the  people.  A  great 
deal  of  valuable  work  has  undoubtedly  been  done,  in  the  teaching 
of  English  and  civics,  in  the  industrial  classes,  and  in  the  provision 
for  recreation.  But  to  Jewish  things,  the  attitude  has  been  negative. 
A  'religious  school'  and  Sabbath  services  for  children  have,  indeed,  been 
conducted,  but  in  the  manner  and  spirit  antagonistic  to  the  concep- 
tions of  the  Russian  Jew  for  whom  the  institution  was  created.1 
Whatever  was  most  vital  and  spontaneous  in  the  neighborhood 
received  no  support,  and  often  as  far  as  lay  in  its  power  was  sup- 
pressed in  the  single  effort  to  make  'good  Americans'  out  of  the  Rus- 
sian Jew. 

Naturally,  the  confidence  of  the  Russian  Jews  was  never  gained 
and  a  rift  of  misunderstanding  has  always  existed  between  the  Educa- 
tional Alliance  and  the  East  Side.  It  has  never  ceased  to  be  regarded 
as  an  institution  from  the  outside  world  condescendingly  philan- 
thropic. Thus  it  missed  a  wonderful  opportunity  for  working  out  a 
democratic  scheme  of  assimilation  and  for  helping  a  neighborhood 
full  of  cultural  forces  and  idealistic  tendencies  to  find  itself  in  Ameri- 
can life  and  to  contribute  to  it.  Even  from  its  own  point  of  view  of 
Americanization  it  has  not  accomplished  its  function,  for  it  has 
been  only  an  incidental  force  in  the  inevitable  process  of  the  Ameri- 
canization of  the  population  of  the  East  Side.  It  has  failed  to  add 

JAs  a  matter  of  fact,  though  the  Alliance  exists  for  the  Russian  Jew,  one  is  led  to 
suspect  in  reading  the  annual  reports  that  it  was  not  his  beneBt  solely  that  motivated 
the  activities.  The  institution  was  not  an  expression  of  neighborhood  feeling,  but  was 
the  creation  of  those  Jews  who  lived  uptown,  partly  it  would  seem  for  their  own 
protection.  These  Jews  who  had  come  to  America  between  1850  and  1870  had 
risen  to  position  in  American  life,  and  had  become  at  least  in  their  own  eyes 
thoroughly  assimilated.  They  feared  that  the  peculiar  ways  of  the  newcomers  might 
reflect  upon  them  since  all  Jews  are  generally  regarded  by  the  non-Jewish  community 
as  "being  responsible  one  for  another."  Consequently  the  Educational  Alliance  was 
founded,  to  educate  the  immigrants  out  of  their  old  ways  so  that  they  might  not  dis- 
turb the  peace  and  good  will  that  the  older  inhabitants  had  attained.  In  this  they 
meant  no  unkindness,  perhaps.  They  knew  that  they  had  been  successful  in  their 
own  struggle  for  a  place  in  American  life,  and  threw  themselves  wholeheartedly  into 
the  task  of  making  the  immigrants  as  closely  as  possible  according  to  their  own  image. 
One  must,  of  course,  recognize  that  on  the  part  of  some  there  was  a  real  humanitarian 
(though  perhaps  not  intelligent)  motive;  but  the  feeling  of  need  of  self-defense  stands 
out  too  clearly  and  moulds  the  character  of  the  work  only  too  evidently.  See  Annual 
Reports,  1893-1908,  especially  Dec.,  1896,  pp.  24-16;  Jan.,  1898,  p.  34  ff.;  1901,  pp.  36, 
37;  1903,  pp.  79-80-8;  1906,  p.  52. 


58  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

to  the  general  Americanizing  influence  of  the  social  and  educational 
environment  what  it  might  have  added — and  what  alone  could  have 
justified  its  existence  as  a  Jewish  institution — a  finer  interpretation 
of  Americanism  in  the  light  of  Jewish  thought  and  an  enrichment  of 
American  life  through  a  utilization  of  the  spiritual  forces  inherent  in 
the  life  of  these  foreign-born  Jews.  Perhaps  its  saddest  contribution 
is  its  influence  upon  other  institutions.  In  its  lack  of  sympathy  and 
at  times  antagonism  to  things  Jewish  it  struck  a  false  note  which  was 
reechoed  in  many  subsequent  attempts.  Since  the  Alliance  came 
first,  is  the  largest  institution  of  its  kind,  and  had  an  unusually 
powerful  backing,  it  was  naturally  followed  by  other  institutions, 
with  the  result  that  Jewish  social  work  has  received  an  impetus 
contrary  to  the  ideas  of  sympathy,  tolerance  and  respect  for  expres- 
sion of  personality  so  necessary  in  the  democratic  ideal.1 

The  New  York  public  schools  offer  another  example  of  an  un- 
exampled opportunity  for  intelligent  work  with  immigrant  people 
wasted  through  lack  of  understanding.  In  no  city  in  the  country  is 
the  problem  of  greater  importance  than  here,  where  the  majority  of 

'After  careful  consideration  the  writer  believes  that  these  strictures  are  necessary 
to  state  the  plain  truth.  Nevertheless,  the  following  qualifications  are  equally  neces- 
sary to  avoid  a  false  impression.  The  criticism  is  against  the  Americanization  policy 
of  the  Alliance  which  it  regards  as  its  essential  work.  There  is  no  desire  to  imply 
that  the  Alliance  has  not  been  useful  in  furnishing  certain  excellent  activities  such  as 
its  various  classes,  its  reading  room,  its  gymnasium,  etc.  Furthermore,  not  all  the 
directors  are  at  one  in  regard  to  the  policy.  There  are  some  liberal  influences  and  in 
recent  years  these  have  tended  to  multiply.  The  Twenty-fifth  Annual  Report  shows 
a  delightful  change  in  attitude  toward  the  immigrant  from  the  monotonous  unvarying 
indictment  of  the  reports  from  1893  to  1908.  It  is  for  the  first  time  discovered  that 
Jewish  and  Hebrew  conceptions  have  much  in  common  with  American  ideas  and  that 
assimilation  of  the  Russian  Jew  to  the  ideals  of  America  ought  not  to  be  very  difficult 
(see  speech  of  Justice  Greenbaum);  while  in  all  the  previous  reports  the  Russian 
Jews  are  pictured  as  unfortunates  coming  from  a  benighted  country  whose  govern- 
ment is  so  different  from  our  own,  etc.  The  change  can  be  traced  to  certain  very 
definite  factors.  I  am  informed,  however,  from  authoritative  sources  that  the  old 
forces  still  have  considerable  potency  and  that  it  is  too  early  to  conclude  that  a  real 
change  of  heart  has  come  about  in  the  controlling  policy.  Finally,  it  is  important  to 
note  that  the  workers  of  the  institution  have  not  all  or  at  all  times  reflected  the  opinion 
of  the  directors,  and  much  of  the  good  work  of  the  Alliance  was  done  in  spite  of  stub- 
born opposition.  The  tragic  struggle  and  martyrdom  of  David  Blaustein,  a  man  who 
had  an  unusually  fine  insight  into  the  problem  and  whose  dream  of  a  "People's  Palace" 
might  be  regarded  as  the  bridge  between  the  older  humanitarian  conception  of  the 
"Settlement"  and  the  modern  democratic  notion  of  the  "Community  Centre,"  is 
perhaps  too  well  known  to  need  recounting  here  (see  Memoirs  of  David  Blaustein  by 
Miriam  Blaustein). 


THEORIES   OF   ETHNIC   ADJUSTMENT  59 

the  population  are  foreign-born  or  the  children  of  foreign-born. 
The  Jewish  children  alone  represent  over  forty  per  cent  of  the  general 
school  population,  while  in  some  neighborhoods  they  number  over 
ninety-five  per  cent.  There  are  many  examples  of  kindly  sympathy 
and  understanding  on  the  part  of  individual  teachers  and  principals, 
but  the  attitude  of  the  official  system  is  intolerant.  The  following 
reply  given  recently  by  the  Superintendent  of  the  New  York  Public 
Schools  to  a  query  as  to  his  conception  of  Americanization  reflects  the 
official  attitude:  "Americanization  is  a  spiritual  thing  difficult  of  de- 
termination in  mere  language.  Broadly  speaking,  we  mean  by  it  an 
appreciation  of  the  institutions  of  this  country,  absolute  forgetfulness 
of  all  obligations  or  connections  with  other  countries  because  of  descent 
or  birth"1  There  is  a  realization  here  that  the  problem  must  be  seen 
through  the  positive  terms  of  a  loyalty  to  the  new  life,  but  the  nega- 
tive attitude  toward  the  past  of  the  immigrant's  life  is  still  conceived 
of  as  being  an  essential  part  of  the  process  of  assimilation. 

An  attitude  even  more  disappointing  is  represented  by  the  "Ameri- 
canization" policy  suggested  in  Professor  Cubberley's  Changing 
Conceptions  of  Education?  It  is  quoted  at  length,  because  it  is  such  a 
clear  and  full  statement  of  the  position,  and  because  it  offers  an 
excellent  basis  for  a  critical  analysis  of  this  theory  of  assimilation. 

About  1882,  the  character  of  our  immigration  changed  in  a  very  remarkable 
manner.  Immigration  from  the  north  of  Europe  dropped  off  rather  abruptly,  and  in 
its  place  immigration  from  the  south  and  east  of  Europe  set  in  and  soon  developed 
into  a  great  stream.  After  1880,  southern  Italians  and  Sicilians;  people  from  all  parts 
of  that  medley  of  races  known  as  the  Austro-Huvgarian  Empire;  Czechs,  Moravians, 
Slovak,  Poles,  Jews,  Ruthenians,  Creations,  Servians,  Dalmatians,  Slovenians, 
Magyars,  Roumanians,  Austrians  and  Slavs,  Poles  and  Jews  from  Russia  began  to 
come  in  great  numbers.  After  1900,  Finns  from  the  north,  driven  out  by  Russian 
persecution,  and  Greeks,  Syrians  and  Armenians  from  the  south,  have  come  in  great 
numbers  to  our  shores. 

These  southern  and  eastern  Europeans  are  of  a  very  different  type  from  the  north 
European  who  preceded  them.  Illiterate,  docile,  lacking  in  self-reliance  and  initiative 
and  not  possessing  the  Anglo-Teutonic  conceptions  of  law,  order  and  government, 
their  coming  has  served  to  dilute  tremendously  our  national  stock,  and  to  corrupt  our 

italics  mine.     The  Evening  Post,  August  9,  1918. 
2Riverside  Educational  Monographs,  1909. 


60  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

civic  life.  The  great  bulk  of  these  people  have  settled  in  the  cities  of  the  North  Atlantic 
and  North  Central  states,  and  the  problems  of  housing  and  living,  moral  and  sanitary 
conditions,  honest  and  decent  government,  and  proper  education  have  everywhere 
been  made  more  difficult  by  their  presence.  Everywhere  these  people  tend  to  settle  in 
groups  or  settlements,  and  to  set  up  here  their  national  manners,  customs  and  observ- 
ances. Our  task  is  to  break  up  their  groups  or  settlements,  to  assimilate  and  amalgamate 
these  people  as  a  part  of  our  American  race,  and  to  implant  in  their  children,  so  far  as 
can  be  done,  the  Anglo-Saxon  conception  of  righteousness,  law  and  order  and  popular 
government,  and  to  awaken  in  them  reverence  for  our  democratic  institutions  and  for 
those  things  in  our  national  life  which  we  as  a  people  hold  to  be  of  abiding  worth.1 

These  complacent  statements  were  not  intended  perhaps  for 
careful  analysis  or  discriminating  examination  and  it  may  be  incon- 
siderate to  subject  them  to  undue  scrutiny;  especially  since  the  new 
situation  has  given  us  changed  prejudices  that  will  no  longer  permit 
us  to  mention  all  of  these  various  peoples  in  one  breath  of  denuncia- 
tion and  to  hold  up  the  hyphenate  Anglo- Teutonie  conception  of  law, 
order  and  government,  for  universal  admiration.  But,  while  names 
may  be  changed,  unfortunately  enough  the  underlying  attitude  to- 
ward the  foreigner  remains  the  same  in  most  that  goes  by  the  name  of 
Americanization.  It  is  of  utmost  importance  to  point  out  the  funda- 
mental errors  in  this  mode  of  approach. 

In  the  first  place  we  would  be  suspicious  of  the  lumping  of  some 
twenty-five  various  groups  together  on  the  basis  that  they  are  not 
North  Europeans  and  then  following  the  argument  on  the  assumption 
that  they  are  pretty  nearly  alike  in  reference  to  a  few  chosen  qualities. 
As  a  matter  of  fact  the  differences  between  certain  of  the  specified 
peoples  and  others  will  be  for  ad  to  be  greater  in  reference  to  some  or 
all  of  the  particular  qualities  mentioned  (conceptions  of  law,  cleanli- 
ness, literacy,  initiative,  etc.)  than  is  their  difference  from  the  average 
American  or  from  the  older  stocks.  It  is,  of  course,  not  true  that 
every  one  of  these  groups  is,  generally  speaking,  inferior  to  the  older 
stocks  in  all  of  the  qualities  mentioned;  in  reference  to  certain 
qualities  some  of  the  stocks  would  seem  to  be  decidedly  superior! 
But  apart  from  the  facts  at  issue,  what  is  most  objectionable  is  the 
prejudgment  of  hosts  of  men  on  the  basis  that  they  do  not  belong  to  a 

»pp.  16-16. 


THEORIES   OF   ETHNIC   ADJUSTMENT  61 

certain  favored  group.  Not  only  do  these  groups  differ  one  from 
another,  but  the  individuals  within  each  group  vary. 

Apart  from  the  dubious  assumption  of  the  superiority  of  one  race 
over  another,  whatever  evidence  we  have  should  utterly  refute  the 
idea  that  knowing  a  man's  race  you  could  know  very  much  about  his 
mental  and  moral  characteristics.  The  variability  amongst  individ- 
uals of  the  same  race  and  the  overlapping  of  one  race  with  another 
are  so  great  in  the  measurement  of  any  trait  in  original  nature,  that 
'race'  becomes  a  useless  criterion  for  determining  an  individual's 
place  on  any  scale  that  one  might  choose  to  measure.  The  one  fact 
of  racial  origin  (at  any  rate,  with  reference  to  all  white  races)  means 
nothing.  This  is  the  scientific  testimony1  which  together  with  a 
democratic  faith  in  the  value  of  all  human  personalities  might  have 
led  to  a  more  tolerant  attitude.  Such  wholesale  condemnation 
runs  counter  current  to  the  first  requisite  condition  of  democracy, 
that  the  unique  make-up  of  individuals  be  taken  into  consideration. 

It  is  erroneous  to  fly  to  the  conclusion  that  the  inferiorities  and  evils 
when  they  do  exist  are  caused  by  the  'race'  of  the  immigrant.  What 
is  more  probable  is  that  social  and  governmental  conditions  in  other 
lands  are  to  be  blamed.  In  that  case  our  theory  of  amelioration 
would  certainly  be  affected.  Indeed,  it  is  also  possible  that  some 
measure  of  the  evils  of  crowded  tenements  and  poor  sanitation  are 
to  be  traced  to  our  own  failure  to  deal  adequately  with  the  problem 
and  perhaps  even  to  our  desire  to  exploit  the  immigrant.  To  throw 
the  entire  blame  on  the  vague  'race'  of  the  immigrant  often  serves 
merely  to  obscure  the  real  causes  and  to  hinder  an  adequate  solution. 
It  tends  to  shift  attention  from  the  true  evils  involved  and  from  the 
reforms  really  required.  Sociological  theorists  are  only  too  often 
innocent  supporters  of  what  are  in  actuality  the  prejudices  and 
interests  of  the  classes. 

America,  it  should  be  remembered,  does  not  exist  for  the  benefit  of 
any  one  class  of  persons,  whether  we  consider  the  grouping  economic, 
political,  or  racial.  The  idea  that  the  predominating  stock  of  the 
inhabitants  of  the  United  States  is  Anglo-Saxon  is  a  myth.  The 

1Tlionidike,  Educational  Psychology,  Vol.  III. 


62  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

composite  American  is  a  multiform  hyphenate:  Scotch-Irish-English- 
German-Spanish-Polish-Jewish-Italian-Russian,  etc.,  etc.  All  of 
these  are  represented  in  fair  numbers  in  the  new  "Galilee  of  the 
Nations."  To  conceive  of  America  as  belonging  exclusively  to  one 
race,  because  priority  of  habitation  has  given  it  a  divine  right  to 
possession  of  the  land,  is  a  notion  contrary  to  democracy.  Indeed, 
this  minority,  due  to  its  priority  and  to  the  undoubted  excellence  of 
native  gifts,  has  stamped  its  culture  ineffaceably  upon  American  life, 
its  language,  its  political  organization  and  spiritual  aspirations. 
The  influence  of  this  group  outweighs,  justly,  that  to  which  its  numeri- 
cal strength  would  entitle  it.  To  say,  however,  that  American 
institutions  and  forms  of  life  have  once  for  all  been  fixed  by  the  fathers 
of  our  country  and  that  the  newcomers,  the  majority,  must  mould 
themselves  into  these  forms,  is  itself  contradictory  to  the  principle 
of  freedom  upon  which  these  forms  are  built  and  of  which  they 
are  but  a  particular  and  perhaps  inadequate  expression.  Our  new- 
comers had  no  voice  in  the  formation  of  these  institutions,  and  to 
force  them  upon  the  immigrant  without  regard  to  his  consent  and 
without  permitting  his  own  personality  to  modify  them  in  the  least 
is  an  arbitrariness  suggestive  of  tyranny  rather  than  democracy. 
Many  of  these  foreigners  fleeing  from  religious,  cultural,  and  political 
oppression  come  to  America  to  seek  the  spiritual  freedom  which  the 
constitution  grants  but  which  an  interpretation  in  accordance  with 
this  line  of  thought  completely  abrogates.  Of  what  significance  is 
V  the  opportunity  of  economic  advancement,  if  it  must  be  bought  at  the 
price  of  suppression  of  individuality?  Even  under  the  conditions  of 
Russian  persecution  the  Jew  was  permitted  to  speak  his  own  language 
and  to  live  in  many  senses  an  independent  cultural  life.  But  if 
a  conception  of  Americanism  as  here  outlined  is  to  be  followed,  such 
rights  would  be  taken  from  him,  in  this  country  whose  distinct  and 
peculiar  excellence  lies  in  its  gift  of  freedom.  The  result  of  such  a 
program  of  Americanization  is  a  tyranny  over  the  beliefs  and  minds 
of  men  worse  than  the  economic  and  political  slavery  from  which 
they  fled.  Those  who  would  put  the  immigrant  into  an  American 
straight-jacket  may  be  superficially  American  in  that  they  attempt 
to  adjust  to  the  established  forms  of  American  life;  they  are  not  true 


THEORIES   OF   ETHNIC    ADJUSTMENT  63 

to  the  fundamental  spirit  of  American  life  and  American  institutions, 
which  is  to  liberate  and  not  to  suppress  the  individuality  of  men. 

Thus  again  this  conception  of  Americanization  fundamentally 
transgresses  the  first  doctrine  of  democracy,  that  the  unique  individ- 
ual must  be  taken  into  account  in  considering  the  end  of  his  own 
development  and  the  standard  of  his  own  good.  The  theory  under 
discussion  implies  the  unquestionable  superiority  of  one  group,  of  the 
Anglo-Saxon  race  and  culture,  and  proceeds  to  judge  the  value  of  the 
other  groups  by  their  approximation  to  this  standard.  There  is  no 
question  here  regarding  the  desirability  of  institutions  and  concep- 
tions objectively  demonstrable  to  be  beneficial  to  the  generality  of 
men.  Cleanliness  and  righteousness  must  be  enforced  because  they 
are  universally  admitted  to  be  good,  not  because  they  are  peculiarly 
Anglo-Saxon  virtues.  Obedience  to  these  cannot  be  regarded  as  an 
external  criterion,  for  they  serve  for  the  good  of  all  men.  Perhaps  it 
is  even  necessary  in  practice  to  go  a  little  further  and  to  maintain — 
although  this  may  not  be  altogether  rationally  defensible — that 
priority  of  occupation  does  give  a  certain  preference  to  the  established 
group  apart  from  or  in  addition  to  any  inherent  excellence.  But  the 
tendency  to  believe  that  America  exists  solely  and  exclusively  for 
the  type  of  life  represented  by  one  particular  group,  must  be  chal- 
lenged. The  assumption  of  total  and  exclusive  superiority  on  the 
part  of  one  group  amounts  to  the  imposition  of  an  external  standard 
which  does  not  reckon  with  those  concerned  and  savors  of  a  theocra- 
tic or  of  an  aristocratic  state  rather  than  of  a  democratic  one.  No 
room  is  left  for  taking  the  nature  and  personality  of  the  immigrant 
into  consideration;  his  physical  characteristics,  his  individuality, 
his  ideals  and  culture  are  contemptuously  ignored  as  unworthy  of 
consideration.  The  most  profound  feeling  in  American  tradition  is 
violated,  the  fundamental  intuition  upon  which  American  institu- 
tions and  political  organizations  are  based,  namely,  a  decent  respect 
for  the  worth  of  personalities  which  are  not  altogether  like  ours  and  a 
sincere  faith  in  their  potentialities. 

But  not  even  in  a  democracy,  one  might  say,  are  all  individuals 
to  be  tolerated  and  every  inclination  permitted  to  have  its  way. 
Perhaps  the  tenor  of  the  argument  even  thus  far  will  carry  the  con- 


64  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

viction  that  no  individualistic  position  is  proposed  here  and  more 
will  be  said  later  explicitly  on  this  question.  The  point  urged, 
however,  is  that  no  neglect  of  interests  or  suppression  of  personalities 
is  permissible  in  a  democracy  without  some  definite  demonstration 
of  the  evil  effects.  Even  criminals  cannot  be  convicted  without 
due  process  of  law  and  in  accordance  with  democratic  notions  they 
are  to  be  considered  innocent  until  proved  guilty.  In  the  face  of  the 
fact  that  the  United  States  is  richer,  more  powerful,  more  highly 
cultured,  and  its  moral  outlook  as  lofty  as  it  was  in  the  days  of  the 
fathers  of  our  country,  in  spite  of  a  continuous  stream  of  immigra- 
tion, positive  evidence  would  be  needed  to  prove  that  our  fundamental 
institutions  are  being  threatened.  Problems  have  been  created; 
but  who  can  say  that  even  these  problems  have  not  within  them  the 
seed  of  a  contribution?  The  evil  result  is  often  due  to  the  lack  of 
understanding  in  meeting  the  new  problem  presented  rather  than 
to  something  inherent  in  the  situation.  The  difference  between 
the  democratic  attitude  and  the  autocratic  one  would  be  just  this: 
the  democratic  attitude  would  have  faith  in  the  worth  of  a  personality 
until  positive  proof  of  its  inferiority  were  presented;  the  autocratic 
would  condemn  without  proof.  What  is  America  if  not  liberal  and 
generous?  Not  that  which  is  the  least,  but  that  which  is  the  most  com- 
patible with  its  integrity  must  be  done. 

Ill 

AMERICANIZATION  AS  LIKEMINDEDNESS 

The  emphasis  on  homogeneity  which  characterizes  the  Americani- 
zation theories  undoubtedly  finds  justification  in  the  need  for  national 
unity.  If  the  citizens  of  the  state  are  to  act  upon  their  affairs  with 
reference  to  each  other's  interests  and  for  the  common  good  of  the 
whole  community,  a  certain  degree  of  likemindedness  must  un- 
doubtedly exist  among  them.  Without  common  interests  crystal- 
lized into  common  purposes,  without  the  means  of  communicating 
these  purposes  and  the  relevant  facts  and  ideas  through  a  common 
language,  without  opportunity  for  general  discussion  of  common 
problems  and  for  participation  in  common  tasks  the  democratic  ideal 


THEORIES   OF   ETHNIC   ADJUSTMENT  65 

of  government  by  the  people  remains  impossible  of  attainment. 
More  than  this  the  nation  may  fall  prey  to  dissension  from  within 
and  present  a  weakened  front  to  inimical  forces  from  without.  Apart 
from  the  cultivating  and  humanizing  influence  that  the  inculcation 
of  any  great  tradition  may  have,  Americanization  finds  its  irrefutable 
defense  in  the  need  of  likemindedness  to  safeguard  the  very  existence 
of  the  state. 

However  proper  in  its  motives  the  current  'Americanization'  theory 
with  its  connotation  of  "breaking  up  communities,"  of  "ironing  out 
differences,"  of  casting  the  immigrant  into  the  mould  of  a  standardized 
American  is  false  in  effect,  not  only  because  it  does  not  give  con- 
sideration to  the  personality  of  the  immigrant,  not  only  because  its 
method  is  psychologically  indefensible,  but  especially  because  it 
fails  to  grasp  adequately  the  basic  principle  of  its  own  purpose, 
that  of  creating  likemindedness.  Its  conception  of  likemindedness 
is  superficial  and  primitive.  It  is  the  application  of  a  primitive  idea 
of  what  'like'  means  to  a  complex  modern  social  situation  that 
makes  the  'Americanization'  theory,  as  ordinarily  understood  and 
advocated,  so  tragically  erroneous. 

The  hiatus  between  the  means  applied  and  the  results  expected, 
which  is  so  striking  to  the  civilized  person  when  he  observes  the  manip- 
ulations of  magic  among  primitive  men,  in  all  likelihood  does  not  at 
all  disturb  the  savage.  No  feeling  of  a  gap  is  present  in  his  mental 
reaction  toward  these  ceremonies.  According  to  his  mental  cate- 
gories likeness  of  sense  and  emotional  appeal  gives  the  impression 
of  complete  similarity,  and  similarity  somehow  has  a  causative 
potency.  To  make  an  effigy  of  the  enemy  arid  stick  daggers  into  it, 
is  felt  to  be  'like'  doing  the  real  thing,  and  is  accompanied  by  a  feeling 
of  satisfaction  and  accomplishment.  A  discriminating  intellect, 
intent  upon  the  practical  outcome,  would  not  feel  such  an  action 
as  relevant  to  or  'like'  the  real  task.  When  it  seems  apparent  even 
to  the  primitive  mind  that  the  two  actions  are  not  identical,  there  is 
attributed  to  the  similar  action  a  potency  which  causes  the  desired 
action  to  occur.  It  is  vaguely  felt  that  the  dagger  piercing  the  effigy 
in  some  way  causes  the  destruction  of  the  human  object  of  hatred. 
Similarity  to  senses  and  emotions  assumes  a  causative  power. 


66  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

Whenever  a  new  problem  occurs  in  a  highly  emotional  situation, 
undiscriminating  minds  will  tend  to  respond  in  the  fashion  characteris- 
tic of  primitive  men.  Burning  and  burying  the  Kaiser  in  effigy 
undoubtedly  gave  those  who  participated  in  such  ceremonies  a 
feeling  of  satisfaction,  as  if  they  had  really  accomplished  something. 
What  is  satisfying  to  the  senses  and  the  emotions  tends  to  be  totally 
satisfying  even  when  the  rational  end  of  the  action  is  not  fulfilled. 
Naturally  such  emotional  and  sensory  responses  often  prevent  the 
attention  from  centering  itself  upon  the  real  work  to  be  done. 

The  conception  of  likemindedness  underlying  the  current  'Ameri- 
canization' theory  partakes  of  the  primitive  notion  that  'like'  means 
similar  to  senses  and  emotions  and  that  it  implies  causative  potency. 
The  attention  centres  upon  outward  conformity,  which  is  conceived 
as  likemindedness  and  as  being  productive  of  unity.  Men  are 
thought  of  as  being  alike  when  they  look  alike,  when  they  dress  alike, 
when  they  speak  the  same  language,  and  these  external  similarities 
seem  to  be  considered  sufficient  for  bringing  about  an  inner  national 
unity.  Differences  in  manner,  speech  and  dress  have  a  disturbing 
effect  upon  the  attention,  and  if  only  these  distinctions  could  be 
eliminated,  it  is  felt,  what  harmony  there  would  be !  Hence  the  tre- 
mendous anxiety  to  have  the  races  fuse,  to  do  away  with  dissimilar 
customs,  to  abolish  foreign  languages.  If  all  Americans  could  be 
made  to  seem  alike,  unity  would  be  assured.  Similarity  will  bring 
about  unity  somehow,  even  if  in  itself  it  is  not  unity. 

This  desire  for  conformity,  an  emotional  response  in  a  situation 
which  is  felt  as  dangerous,  is  increased  further  by  the  apprehension 
of  public  opinion.  It  is  good  to  be  able  to  demonstrate  Ameri- 
canization. Directors  of  social  settlements  and  principals  of  schools 
are  anxious  to  be  able  to  show  that  those  in  their  charge  are  American. 
To  permit  or  promote  differences  is  not  quite  safe;  they  may  imply 
divergences  not  in  harmony  with  a  one  hundred  per  cent  patriotism. 
To  level  down  to  an  accepted  standard  which  everyone  can  recognize 
and  no  one  question  is  the  easiest  and  the  most  practical  plan. 

There  is  a  third  force,  perhaps,  in  addition  to  a  primitive  psychology 
and  the  apprehension  of  public  opinion,  that  tends  to  stress  the  im- 
portance of  conformity,  namely  the  American  aptitude  for  standardi- 


THEORIES   OF   ETHNIC   ADJUSTMENT  67 

zation.  Machinery  has  been  standardized;  clothes,  food,  school 
buildings,  handwriting  have  all  been  standardized.  Why  not 
standardize  personalities?  And  educational  thought  forthwith  busies 
itself  with  the  standard  American,  to  be  produced  with  the  minimum 
of  effort  and  most  quickly  by  the  appropriate  educational  machinery.  ' 

A  conception  of  likemindedness  which  identifies  it  with  conformity 
is  both  inadequate  and  erroneous.  It  permits  outward  resemblances 
to  hide  inward  disunities;  it  crushes  inner  unities  for  the  sake  of  out- 
ward conformities.  In  accordance  with  such  a  notion  the  unscrupu- 
lous politician  and  the  exploiter  of  the  social  good  may  be  considered 
the  best  Americans,  and  the  foreign-tongued  social  reformer,  even 
were  both  his  theory  and  practiced  plan  valid,  would  tend  to  be 
considered  un-American. 

A  more  adequate  conception  of  a  true  Americanization  policy 
will  appear  if  we  scrutinize  somewhat  more  carefully  the  word  'like- 
mindedness.' 'Like,'  if  it  is  to  mean  anything,  must  signify  not  a 
vague  general  resemblance,  but  similarity  in  reference  to  the  specific 
interest.  Sticking  daggers  into  an  effigy  is  not  'like'  killing  the  man, 
because  in  reference  to  the  essential  purpose  there  is  no  resemblance. 
Were  we  interested  in  race  likeness,  language  likeness,  or  dress  like- 
ness the  current  Americanization  notion  might  satisfy.  But  what  we 
are  interested  in  is  likemindedness. 

The  word  'mindedness'  implies  a  likeness  not  alone  in  reference  to 
means.  Mind  signifies  purposeful  action,  and  the  term  'likeminded- 
ness' when  used  as  a  justification  of  Americanism  must  direct  itself 
to  a  unity  of  social  aims,  beyond  all  else.  In  so  far  as  likemindedness 
requires  conformities  in  manner  and  language  as  prerequisites,  it  will 
be  necessary  to  insist  on  these.  But  sheer  destruction  of  divergences 
without  reference  to  the  ultimate  purpose  cannot  be  defended  on 
grounds  of  'likemindedness.'  What  the  promotion  of  unity  implies 
is  an  emphasis  upon  the  deep-lying  purposes  of  American  tradition 
rather  than  an  exclusive  attention  upon  its  instruments  or  upon  the 
negative  task  of  the  elimination  of  possible  disturbances. 

Americanization  is  a  positive  task,  not  a  negative  one.     Forgetting    \ 
other  languages  and  other  traditions,  destruction  of  other  spiritual 
allegiances  is  not  an  essential  part  of  it,  or  if  it  is  truly  seen  any  part 


68  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

of  it  at  all.  Americanization  is  a  constructive  work  of  developing 
knowledge,  ideas,  social  attitudes;  conceptions  of  law,  order,  govern- 
ment; interpretations  of  duty,  freedom  and  the  meaning  of  life. 
It  implies  above  all  the  creation  of  a  psychological  attitude  of  willing- 
ness to  serve  the  nation  rather  than  the  self,  the  family,  the  class,  or 
the  group  exclusively.  How  inadequate  is  that  notion  which  identi- 
fies training  for  citizenship  with  'coaching'  on  the  answers  to  questions 
which  will  be  asked  of  the  applicant  for  citizen  papers !  How  meagre 
is  the  plan  which  looks  only  to  conformities  in  dress  and  speech. 
But  even  more  objectionable  is  the  current  'Americanization'  theory, 
which  regards  the  uprooting  of  foreign  tradition  as  a  necessary 
antecedent  to  true  assimilation.  If  Americanism  has  to  do  with 
social  ideals,  is  it  not  quite  possible  that  it  will  have  kinship  with  other 
traditions?  May  not  understanding  of  another  tradition  be  an  aid 
rather  than  a  hindrance  ? 

A  little  thought  would  reveal  that  not  only  is  there  a  possibility 
of  common  elements  in  two  traditions:  there  is  rather  a  necessity. 
Any  social  tradition  which  has  lived  for  some  time  embodies  institu- 
tions, customs,  ideas  which  promote  the  living  together  of  men. 
These  may  have  reference  to  local  conditions,  to  particular  periods, 
to  certain  types  of  men.  But  it  would  argue  a  disparateness  which  is 
untenable  in  human  affairs,  to  maintain  that  all  of  these  are  sectional 
and  particularistic  and  that  there  are  not  some  which  embody 
elements  of  the  universal.  With  the  length  of  a  tradition  and  with 
the  breadth  of  its  experience,  the  chances  for  possibility  of  wide  appli- 
cation become  greatly  increased.  Undoubtedly  there  will  be  found 
elements  in  the  European  traditions  which  can  be  of  service  in  the 
upbuilding  of  American  life.  For  Americanism  itself  is  not  exclusive 
and  sectarian;  its  ends  are  broadly  human.  A  sympathetic  and 
constructively  minded  statesman  or  educator  with  insight  into  the 
nature  of  social  tradition  would  immediately  recognize  that  every 
foreign  system  has  within  it  possibilities  of  interpretation  in  terms  of 
American  life.  The  most  stupid  thing  in  the  'Americanization'  pro- 
gram is  the  failure  to  recognize  that  the  morality,  folkways,  ideas 
and  aspirations  of  the  immigrant  groups  could  be  utilized  for  the 
development  of  true  Americans  out  of  immigrants. 


THEORIES   OF   ETHNIC   ADJUSTMENT  69 

With  contemptuous  neglect,  often  with  direct  opposition,  the  cur- 
rent 'Americanization'  theory  has  tended  to  break  down  deep-laid 
traditional  social  attitudes  of  respect  for  family,  for  kin  and  for  the 
ethnic  community;  for  the  ideas  of  duty,  service  and  self-restraint 
that  such  loyalties  involve.  The  public  school  system  has  not  suc- 
ceeded in  implanting  equally  deep-rooted  conceptions  of  service; 
it  has  not  realized  how  interwoven  with  the  integrity  of  the  family, 
and  of  the  "consciousness-of-kind"  groups,  is  the  loyalty  to  the  state 
and  to  society  as  a  whole.  The  assumption  was  that  breaking  down 
a  loyalty  of  seemingly  smaller  range  leads  of  itself  to  a  wider  loyalty. 
It  does  not,  necessarily.  More  often  it  leads  to  license  and  to  individ- 
ualism in  the  bad  sense  of  that  word.  The  notorious  increase  of 
criminality  in  the  American-born  second  generation  is  due  to  the 
breach  made  in  the  social  tradition  of  the  family.  Very  often  the 
foreign  system  of  traditional  morality  breaks  down  not  because  it  is 
inferior  in  aspiration  but  because  it  cannot  adapt  itself  to  apply 
to  the  new  conditions.  In  such  cases  it  should  be  the  policy  to  rein- 
terpret and  apply  in  reference  to  the  new  conditions,  not  to  destroy 
it  or  to  permit  it  to  disintegrate  in  the  transition  from  one  environ- 
ment to  another.  Once  morality  and  idealism  have  been  implanted 
these  attitudes  may  be  transferred  from  one  social  situation  to 
another  much  more  easily  than  they  can  be  developed  altogether 
anew.  Much  of  the  lofty  idealism  and  exalted  loyalty  among  Ameri- 
cans of  foreign  near-ancestry  are  attitudes  transferred  from  their 
ethnic  tradition  to  the  new  life.  It  is  possible  to  speak  of  justice, 
duty,  service  and  loyalty,  of  law,  order  and  government  in  other 
languages  than  English.  Yet  too  often  does  the  'Americanization' 
theory  imply  that  righteousness  is  Anglo-Saxon  exclusively  and  that 
foreign  languages  ought  therefore  not  to  be  tolerated.  If  the  concept 
of  likemindedness  be  carefully  borne  in  mind  it  must  lead  to  the 
realization  that  Americanization  will  be  served  very  often  by  a  con- 
servation of  social  ideals  even  when  they  are  foreign  rather  than  by  a 
destruction  of  them. 

If  we  turn  our  attention  from  the  objective  aspect — ideas,  aspira- 
tions, purposes — implied  in  likemindedness  to  the  inner  personal 
organic  common  feeling  connoted  in  the  phrase,  "to  be  minded  alike," 


70  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

the  need  for  a  sympathetic  attitude  toward  the  foreigner  again  becomes 
clear.  The  immigrant  must  be  made  to  feel  American;  it  is  not 
sufficient  that  he  strive  in  an  objective  way  or  mechanically  for  ends 
which  can  be  identified  as  American.  For  it  is  such  whole-hearted 
emotional  identification  with  the  body  of  citizens  which  is  at  the 
basis  of  a  lasting  allegiance.  Now  the  current  'Americanization* 
theory,  which  contemptuously  places  the  immigrant  outside  of  the 
group  and  gives  him  a  share  in  the  people's  heritage  only  when  he 
divests  himself  of  his  most  significant  characteristics,  is  not  calcu- 
lated to  promote  that  feeling  of  common  ownership  and  responsibil- 
ity which  is  the  sine  qua  non  of  the  community  spirit.  How  can  the 
immigrant  feel  himself  part  of  the  people  when  those  who  are  recog- 
nizedly  of  the  people  place  him  outside?  Such  a  course  must  drive 
the  self-respecting  among  the  immigrants  to  a  heightened  self- 
consciousness  which  divides  his  group,  in  heart,  from  the  American 
people.  This  attitude  taken  towards  the  immigrant  acts  like  anti- 
Semitism  toward  the  Jew,  impressing  upon  him  a  feeling  of  separate- 
ness  from  the  general  body  of  citizens. 

The  more  the  immigrant  is  permitted  to  retain  and  to  develop  his 
own  type  of  life,  when  these  are  not  detrimental  to  the  general  good, 
the  more  likely  will  he  be  drawn  to  feel  that  this  really  is  his  country. 
The  splendid  loyalty  that  immigrants  have  shown  toward  America 
and  their  heartfelt  reverence  for  the  new  Promised  Land  are  the 
result  of  no 'Americanization' program,  but  of  living  under  institutions 
which  by  their  very  nature  permitted  economic  advance,  educational 
opportunities,  and  individual  freedom  in  a  degree  unknown  to  them 
in  the  lands  of  their  birth.  It  is  the  excellence  of  American  tradition 
working  indirectly  and  spontaneously  which  Americanizes,  not  the 
direct  application  of  strict  methods.  The  general  work  of  the  public 
schools,  giving  the  individual  a  better  start  in  life,  permitting  him 
to  make  more  out  of  himself,  has  in  all  likelihood  done  more  for  the 
inculcation  of  a  desire  to  maintain  these  institutions  than  any  direct 
teaching  could  have  done.  High-handed  artificial  methods  negate 
the  natural  effect  of  democratic  American  life  which  is  to  identify 
the  good  of  the  individual  with  the  good  of  the  state.  If  the  immi- 
grant is  to  attain  to  a  whole-hearted  allegiance  and  undivided  loyalty 


THEORIES   OF   ETHNIC    ADJUSTMENT  71 

to  America,  he  must  be  regarded  as  kin  with  the  other  citizens, 
i.e.,  as  a  man  whose  personality  must  be  respected,  not  as  an  inferior 
being  whose  individuality  must  be  obliterated. 

In  yet  a  third  way  can  the  term  'likemindedness'  help  to  a  better 
conception  of  what  proper  assimilation  means,  namely  through  a 
consideration  of  the  educational  method  that  a  developing  mind 
implies.  In  the  development  of  mind,  it  is  necessary  to  start  with 
the  present  mental  situation,  with  the  apperceptive  mass  of  ideas, 
interests  and  associations.  In  general  education  it  is  the  pupil 
that  furnishes  the  method;  in  the  Americanization  of  the  foreigner, 
the  latter  is  the  starting  point.  The  teacher  must  understand  the 
tradition  and  past  experiences  of  the  immigrant  if  he  is  really  to 
develop  his  mind.  He  cannot  neglect  these  and  get  his  own  thought 
across.  The  process,  too,  requires  patience,  and  will  be  slow  and 
developmental  rather  than  hasty  and  forced.  The  terms  'break  up' 
and  'iron  out'  should  be  expunged  from  the  vocabulary  of  assimila- 
tion. These  are  not  words  which  are  congruous  with  the  ideas  of 
growth,  implied  in  the  living  mind.  They  savor  of  the  methods  of 
Russification  that  used  to  be  practiced  by  Russia  and  of  Prussianism 
that  used  to  be  practiced  by  Germany,  rather  than  of  the  technique 
of  democracy  in  education.  Were  Americanism  conceivable  as  a 
completed  doctrine,  handed  down  through  generations  by  authorita- 
tive interpreters,  it  would  be  easier  to  think  of  Americanization  as 
conformity  to  a  certain  fixed  type  or  standard.  But,  since  the  demo- 
cratic faith  looks  upon  the  living  forces  in  human  nature  as  primary 
and  respects  personality  above  all  else,  standardization  of  men  must 
be  recognized  as  the  cardinal  sin. 

Weighed  in  the  balance  of  our  first  and  fundamental  criterion  of 
democracy — respect  for  personality — the  'Americanization'  theory 
must  be  found  wanting.  The  tendency  to  interpret  Americanism 
as  the  culture  of  one  definite  race,  something  well  established  to 
which  the  newcomers  must  completely  conform,  falls  into  the  cate- 
gory of  an  absolutistic  conception  which  assumes  beforehand  what  is 
good  without  relation  to  the  persons  affected.  By  tacitly,  if  not 
expressly,  denying  the  right  of  the  immigrant  to  modify  and  contribute 
to  the  development  of  Americanism,  the  'Americanization'  theory 


72  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

violates  that  notion  which  is  the  quintessence  of  democracy,  namely 
that  the  person  involved  must  be  considered  as  the  end.  Neither  is 
the  second  criterion  of  democracy — a  diversity  in  the  environment — 
fulfilled  by  the  'Americanization'  theory.  It  idealizes  a  fixed  type  of 
culture  as  against  a  diversified  culture  enriched  by  the  tradition  of 
many  peoples.  By  the  elimination  of  foreign  ideas  it  would  indoctri- 
nate the  tenets  of  a  nationalistic  cult.  True  liberty  is  served  by  the 
enrichment  of  possibilities,  not  by  the  establishment  of  uniformity. 
Lastly  the  conception  of  socialization  in  the  'Americanization'  theory  is 
faulty.  It  breaks  down  loyalty  to  the  immediate  family  and  to  the 
cultural  institutions — language,  customs,  etc.,  with  which  it  is  affili- 
ated. It  fails  to  realize  that  much  of  what  the  man's  character  is 
depends  upon  the  integrity  of  these  relations.  To  cap  the  climax, 
it  fails  in  relation  to  the  problem  of  affiliating  with  the  new  social  life. 
Its  stress  is  so  negative,  constantly  emphasizing  the  danger  of  the  old 
associations,  that  too  little  attention  is  given  to  the  positive  task — 
and  a  task  it  is — of  building  up  on  a  firm  and  profound  basis  the  cul- 
ture of  the  new  land. 

Thus  the  public  school  graduate  grows  up  to  know  that  he  must 
despise  his  parents  with  their  poor  knowledge  of  English,  that  he 
must  be  thoroughly  conversant  with  the  batting  averages,  and  that 
he  must  possess  a  large  quantity  of  Americanism — 100  per  cent  at 
least!  But  how  shall  he  know  the  profound  quality  of  America? 
Whether  from  the  point  of  view  of  democracy  (which  may  be  con- 
sidered idealistic)  or  from  the  point  of  view  of  efficiency,  the  current 
'Americanization'  theory  fails  to  qualify.  Neither  reason  nor 
practicality  can  justify  it.  It  can  be  explained  only  by  an  emotional 
hysteria  which  bids  us  do  something,  by  the  superficial  intelligence 
which  confuses  the  uniform  with  the  unified,  by  the  will  to  mastery 
which  sometimes  makes  us  brutally  intolerant. 


THEORIES   OF   ETHNIC    ADJUSTMENT  73 

IV 

THE  'MELTING  POT'  THEORYI 

The  'Melting  Pot'  theory  agrees  with  the  'Americanization' 
theory  in  that  both  look  forward  to  a  disappearance  of  divergent 
ethnic  strains  and  cultures  within  the  unity  of  American  life.  Both 
would  sever  the  loyalty  to  the  past  lived  on  a  foreign  soil.  But 
while  our  first  theory  tends  to  look  upon  Americanism  as  essentially 
bound  up  with  Anglo-Saxonism  and  would  give  the  recent  immigrant 
no  part  in  the  development  of  American  culture,  the  second  theory 
welcomes  the  contributions  that  the  new  racial  strains  make  to 
American  life  and  looks  with  favor  upon  the  addition  of  new  cultural 
elements.  Americanism  is  conceived  of  as  in  the  making;  something 
representative  and  growing  out  of  the  people  that  live  here  rather 
than  a  definite  completed  doctrine;  something  much  more  of  the 
future  than  of  the  past.  Americanism  is  a  new  life  to  which  all  can 
contribute.  Out  of  the  present  heterogeneity  of  races  a  new  superior 
race  is  to  be  formed;  out  of  the  present  medley  of  cultures  a  new, 
richer,  more  humane  civilization  is  to  be  created;  out  of  the  present 
ferment  a  new  religion  will  develop  representing  the  spiritual  expres- 
sion of  the  new  people,  a  religion  more  relevant  to  modern  con- 
ceptions of  life  than  the  historical  creeds  and  more  tolerant  of  the 
differences  among  humankind. 

"America  is  God's  Crucible,  the  great  Melting  Pot  where  all  the 
races  of  Europe  are  melting  and  reforming! — Here  you  stand  good 
folk,  think  I,  when  I  see  you  at  Ellis  Island,  here  you  stand,  in  your 
fifty  groups,  with  your  fifty  languages  and  histories,  and  your  fifty 
blood  hatreds  and  rivalries.  But  you  won't  be  long  like  that,  brothers, 
for  these  are  the  fires  of  God  you  come  to — these  are  the  fires  of  God. 
A  fig  for  your  feuds  and  your  vendettas !  German  and  Frenchmen, 
Irishman  and  English,  Jews  and  Russians,  into  the  Crucible  with  you 
all!  God  is  making  the  American!  .  .  .  The  real  American 
has  not  yet  arrived .  He  is  only  in  the  Crucible .  I  tell  you — he  will  be 
the  fusion  of  all  races,  perhaps  the  coming  superman.  . 

'For  writings  indicative  of  this  attitude,  see  Israel  ZangwiU,  The  Melting  Pot; 
Francis  Kellor,  Straight  America;  Mary  Antin,  The  Promised  Land;  Walter  E. 
Ravage,  An  American  in  the  Making. 


74  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

Yes,  East  and  West,  North  and  South,  the  palm  and  the  pine,  the 
pole  and  the  equator,  the  crescent  and  the  cross,  how  the  great 
Alchemist  melts  and  fuses  them  with  purging  flame !  .  Here 

shall  they  all  unite  to  build  the  Republic  of  Man  and  the  Kingdom  of 
God.  Ah,  what  is  the  glory  of  Rome  and  Jerusalem,  where  all  nations 
and  races  come  to  worship  and  look  back,  compared  with  the  glory 
of  America  where  all  nations  come  to  labour  and  look  forward!" 

This  theory  which  Zangwill  evolved  as  the  vision  of  the  ultimate 
goal  of  American  life  many  have  formulated  on  the  side  of  method 
from  their  experience  with  the  process  of  Americanization.  Those 
who  have  themselves  been  immigrants,  like  Steiner  and  Ravage, 
social  workers  with  sympathetic  insight,  like  Frances  Kellor  and 
Jane  Addams,  and  many  gifted  teachers  who  have  taught  the  immi- 
grant have  realized  the  inadequacy  of  the  method  prescribed  by  the 
Americanizationists  even  when  they  agreed  in  the  ultimate  hope  of 
converting  the  foreigner  into  an  American.  They  saw  too  many 
examples  of  elevated  character  and  superior  ability  to  remain  con- 
temptuous; they  were  close  enough  to  the  immigrant  to  see  him  as 
an  individual  person,  not  merely  as  one  of  a  congregate  of  "sheenies" 
or  of  a  horde  of  "wops."  So  it  became  clear  to  them  that  the  social 
and  psychological  "apperceptive  mass"  of  the  immigrant  had  to  be 
taken  into  consideration,  that  it  was  necessary  to  start  from  the  point 
where  he  was  when  he  came  to  our  shores,  and  to  work  slowly,  not 
hastily.  This  is  keener  insight  into  the  nature  of  the  immigrant  and 
better  understanding  of  the  process  involved  in  the  making  of  an 
American.1 

The  'Melting  Pot'  theory  has  a  greater  respect  for  the  facts 
involved  and  a  better  conception  of  the  true  psychological  method. 
The  dubious  assumption  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  character  of  the  popu- 
lation and  of  the  inferiority  of  types  in  the  measure  that  they  diverge 
from  the  North  European  is  not  made  the  basis  of  a  drastic  attempt 
to  mould  all  newcomers  into  the  form  of  the  hypothetical  American. 
The  careless  assumption  that  there  is  a  'typical  American'  easily 
identifiable  and  distributed  in  great  numbers  among  the  population 
has  permitted  the  easy  belief  that  a  stamping  out  of  foreign  charac- 

'Israel  Zangwill,  The  Melting  Pot. 


THEORIES   OF   ETHNIC   ADJUSTMENT  75 

teristics  would  of  itself  make  a  person  an  American.  There  has, 
therefore,  been  a  far  greater  anxiety  concerning  the  elimination  of 
differences  than  careful  thought  in  reference  to  what  is  American 
and  how  to  attain  it.  'The  Melting  Pot'  theory,  less  sure  that  the 
complete  and  typical  American  has  already  been  evolved,  tends  to 
be  more  constructive  in  its  policy.  It  is  seen  clearly  that  such 
emphasis  upon  uprooting  the  tradition  as  is  implied  in  the  'Ameri- 
canization' theory  may  lead  to  the  the  acquisition  of  a  new  culture, 
but  merely  to  the  destruction  of  the  old.  It  understands  that  a 
loyalty  is  not  to  be  built  upon  a  disloyalty.  To  make  a  good  American 
is  a  positive  task;  it  does  not  mean  to  make  a  bad  Italian.  It  is 
apprehensive  of  lack  of  culture  much  more  than  it  is  of  a  diversified 
culture,  and  is,  therefore,  not  so  quick  to  condemn  the  old  heritage 
which  the  immigrant  brings  with  him.  It  tries  rather  to  preserve 
the  old  while  the  new  is  being  formed. 

The  'Melting  Pot'  theory  differs  accordingly  in  the  technique  of  the 
process  of  assimilation.  A  lowering  of  the  morale  of  the  immigrant 
is  to  be  avoided.  Pride  in  his  past  and  in  his  people  is  to  be 
encouraged,  for  our  new  American  must  have  self-respect.  The 
process  is  to  be  gradual,  taking  into  consideration  the  language, 
customs,  and  social  environment  of  the  pupils,  and  building  up  from 
these.  Old  cherished  memories  and  old  ideals  are  not  to  be  forsaken 
in  the  anxious  endeavor  to  teach  the  new.  The  tragedy  of  disinte- 
grated families,  with  a  consequent  loss  of  social  control  is  to  be 
avoided  by  keeping  the  children  faithful  to  the  old  life  while  bringing 
the  parents  nearer  to  the  new.  Whatever  has  been  learned  concern- 
ing the  psychology  of  the  developing  mind  is  to  be  applied  to  the 
process  of  assimilation.  The  'Americanization'  theory  speaks  de  haul 
en  bas,  the  'Melting  Pot'  theory  is  democratic.  Not  one  race  is  singled 
out  as  the  standard;  all  the  races  that  play  a  part  in  American  life 
are  conceived  of  as  having  a  contribution  to  make.  A  better  under- 
standing of  the  foreign  groups,  a  spirit  of  humane  toleration,  and  a 
notion  of  the  dynamic  nature  of  society  pervade  the  Melting  Pot 
idea. 

The  standards  which  have  been  laid  down  as  the  criteria  of  democ- 
racy would  seem  to  be  fully  satisfied  by  the  second  mode  of  assimila- 


76  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

tion.  The  'Melting  Pot'  theory  has  a  profound  respect  for  the  Person. 
He  is  seen  to  be  the  central  fact  in  the  situation.  Americanism  is 
regarded  more  as  a  cultural  and  spiritual  expression  of  the  community 
of  men  who  live  in  America.  The  citizens  of  America  all  participate 
in  the  creation  of  the  common  civilization  and  have  a  part  in  its  modi- 
fication. The  ideal  is  here  related  to  the  persons  whom  it  is  to  serve. 
The  realization  of  the  heterogeneity  of  our  population  leads  to 
an  understanding  that  the  uniqueness  of  each  individual  must  be 
considered.  The  enrichment  of  American  culture,  through  the 
contribution  of  the  many  peoples,  supports  the  idea  of  a  diversity  in 
the  environment  which  forms  our  second  criterion.  Finally,  its 
conception  of  socialization  bears  in  mind  the  actual  social  relations 
of  the  immigrant  and  reckons  with  these  in  building  up  the  loyalty 
to  the  new  life.  From  all  angles  the  'Melting  Pot'  theory  is  seen  to  be 
superior  to  the  'Americanization'  theory  and  to  fulfill  adequately  the 
several  criteria  of  the  democratic  idea. 

However,  self-annihilation  is  the  price  that  the  'Melting-Pot' 
theory  demands  while  permitting  the  foreign  groups  to  contribute  to 
the  life  of  the  new  country.  It  is  by  losing  their  own  corporate 
existence  that  the  foreign  groups  are  conceived  of  as  becoming  part 
of  the  new  nation.  The  new  strains  of  blood  are  mingled  with  the 
old  stock  through  intermarriage;  new  folkways  to  make  a  new  'cake 
of  custom,'  new  ideas  are  conceived  of  as  enriching  the  American 
spiritual  heritage.  But  always  the  community  which  has  made  the  con- 
tribution itself  perishes  as  it  gives  forth  the  products  of  its  own  life. 
The  'Melting  Pot'  theory  is  adequate  only  for  those  groups  which  are 
willing  to  give  up  their  identity  completely  in  becoming  incorporated 
into  the  life  of  America.  It  is  no  solution  for  those  who  wish  to 
participate  in  American  life  and  yet  retain  their  ethnic  identity, 
at  least  in  some  manner.  These  wish  to  make  their  contribution 
perennial,  not  merely  a  once-for-all  contribution.  For  such  groups 
the  'Melting  Pot'  theory,  notwithstanding  its  superiority  of  method, 
is  quite  as  inadequate  as  the  'Americanization'  theory,  for,  in  the 
essential,  the  right  to  maintain  the  ethnic  identity,  both  theories  are 
ultimately  alike;  they  both  lead  to  complete  absorption. 


THEORIES   OF   ETHNIC   ADJUSTMENT  77 

"But  does  a  group,  which  needs  to  be  preserved  forever,  really 
have  a  contribution  to  make?"  is  the  doubting  query.  "If  the  ethnic 
group  really  has  a  contribution  to  make,  why  not  make  it  and  have 
done?  Why  continue  its  existence  interminably?"  The  answer 
of  the  ethnic  groups  is  implicit  in  what  they  wish  to  preserve — 
namely  their  culture.  'Melting  Pot'  theories  usually  stress  the 
contribution  in  terms  of  race,  for  the  physical  heredity  remains  a 
potent  factor  even  after  amalgamation,  entering  as  it  does  as  a  strain 
in  the  make-up  of  the  individual.  The  contribution  in  culture  made 
by  completely  absorbed  groups  is  almost  negligible.  Few  words, 
customs,  or  ideas  are  added  to  the  dominant  culture  by  dying  immi- 
grant peoples.  If  the  factor  of  culture  is  to  become  an  ever  present 
force,  it  is  necessary  to  maintain  the  social  atmosphere  in  which  they 
live.  The  racial  element  is  transmitted  and  preserved  through  the 
germ  plasm  even  after  intermarriage,  while  the  perpetuation  of  cul- 
ture requires  social  organization. 

Physical  heredity  transmits  itself,  so  to  speak;  social  heredity, 
language,  thought,  ideas,  etc.,  which  are  acquired  characteristics 
need  institutions  to  transmit  them.  This  idea  becomes  even  more 
apparent  if  we  draw  the  important  distinction  between  the  two 
meanings  of  the  word  'culture,'  the  cultural  products  of  a  past  life  and 
the  cultural  life  itself.  The  objection  raised  above  can  apply  only 
when  we  interpret  contribution  in  terms  of  specific  products  of  past 
life,  a  word,  a  doctrine,  a  social  custom.  It  needs  no  answer  when 
it  is  interpreted  (as  of  the  ethnic  groups  who  wish  to  retain  their 
cultural  identity)  in  terms  of  the  life  of  a  cultural  nationality.  We 
may  as  well  say,  concerning  any  great  man,  "Let  him  give  his  con- 
tribution and  have  done.  Why  prolong  his  life?"  But  it  is  easily 
seen  that  any  man  is  more  than  a  single  statement  of  his  ideas.  We 
recognize  that  as  long  as  he  lives  he  will  continue  to  interpret  and 
offer  his  ideas  in  new  ways  and  continue  to  develop  new  ideas,  the 
products  of  a  continuous  experience  of  his  personality  with  situa- 
tions. So,  too,  the  nation  must  be  looked  upon  as  an  ethnic 
personality,  whose  existence  is  not  an  idea,  but  a  life.  The  longer 
it  lives,  providing  it  does  not  stagnate  and  retrogress,  the  more  it 
has  to  contribute.  Not  only  the  crystallized  products  of  a  past  life 


78  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

are  conceived  as  being  transferred  and  added  to  the  culture  of  the  new 
land.  The  ethnic  groups  are  seen  as  living  and  growing  communities, 
fruitful  in  cultural  influences,  as  long  as  the  community  maintains 
its  vital  existence.  Not  separate,  fixed,  and  abstracted  ideas  and 
dissociated  customs  are  to  be  contributed,  but  a  unified  life  express- 
ing itself  in  language,  social  atmosphere,  literature  and  religion. 
It  must  be  carefully  borne  in  mind  that  it  is  a  life,  not  the  products  of 
a  life,  that  these  ethnic  groups  wish  to  perpetuate  for  themselves 
and  to  contribute  to  America. 

For  those  ethnic  groups  which  wish  to  maintain  their  cultural 
identity  neither  the  'Americanization'  theory  nor  the  'Melting  Pot' 
theory  can  be  offered  as  a  solution.  Both  these  theories  deprive  the 
immigrant  groups  of  the  right  to  perpetuate  the  group  heritage. 
In  accordance  with  them  the  immigrant  groups  buy  their  freedom  at 
a  cost  of  suppressing  what  many  may  consider  of  highest  worth, 
their  distinct  cultural  and  spiritual  life. 

Were  all  foreign  groups  desirous  of  fusing  and  none  anxious  to 
maintain  their  ethnic  and  cultural  identity,  such  a  method  of  assimila- 
tion as  our  second  theory  implies  would  meet  the  demands  of  a  demo- 
cratic platform.  The  whole  discussion  began  with  the  assumption, 
however,  that  some  groups  desire  to  maintain  their  identity  and  do 
not  want  to  obliterate  themselves.  What  shall  be  our  attitude 
toward  a  group  that  has  a  conscious  desire  to  maintain  its  historic 
identity  and  sets  about  to  organize  its  life  here  in  accordance  with 
this  desire?  Must  such  groups  be  suppressed,  as  the  'Americaniza- 
tion' theory  would  imply,  in  order  to  insure  the  unity  and  perpetuity 
of  American  life?  Or  is  there  a  way  compatible  with  the  best  inter- 
ests of  America  of  preserving  freedom  for  the  immigrant  group  to 
maintain  its  cultural  identity?  The  following  two  theories  offer  solu- 
tions which  look  to  the  retention  of  ethnic  and  cultural  identity  of 
foreign  immigrant  groups  in  contradiction  to  the  theories  already 
presented  which  lead  to  total  fusion.  How  do  they  propose  to 
make  the  adjustment  to  American  life,  and  do  they  square  with 
our  criteria  of  democracy? 


THEORIES   OF   ETHNIC   ADJUSTMENT  79 


THE  'FEDERATION  OF  NATIONALITIES'  THEORY 
Instead  of  eliminating  totally  or  limiting  in  some  degree  the 
influence  of  the  ethnic  grouping  in  favor  of  a  racial  and  cultural 
homogeneity,  the  point  of  view  underlying  the  'Federation  of 
Nationalities'  idea  would  make  the  ethnic  group  paramount  and 
permanent  in  its  influence  on  American  life.  The  ethnic  groupings 
are  to  be  the  basic  groupings;  they  are  regarded  as  comparatively 
stable.  The  purpose  of  the  political  organization  is  to  promote  and 
in  no  way  hinder  their  distinctive  integrity. 

The  basis  of  this  theory  rests  on  the  assumption  that  the  ethnic 
quality  of  an  individual  determines  absolutely  and  inevitably  what 
his  nature  is  to  be.  "Self-hood  ...  is  ancestrally  determined."1 
This  motivating  idea  is  put  dramatically  in  the  phrase  referring  to 
the  immigrant,  "Whatever  else  he  changes,  he  cannot  change  his 
grandfather";  and  more  fully,  "Men  may  change  their  clothes, 
their  politics,  their  wives,  their  philosophies  to  a  greater  or  lesser 
extent;  they  cannot  change  their  grandfathers."  Since  'race'  is 
such  an  ineradicable  and  all  determining  element,  it  is  the  central 
fact  of  any  man's  life.  Government  performs  its  function  of  freeing 
human  capacities  only  when  it  exists  for  the  purpose  of  freeing 
ethnic  expression.  Its  special  function  is  to  permit  free  development 
of  the  ethnic  group,  for  the  individual's  happiness  is  "implied  in 
ancestral  endowment." 

Consequently,  the  proper  form  of  government  for  America  in 
accordance  with  this  underlying  concept  is  a  "Federal  republic;  its 
substance  a  democracy  of  nationalities,  cooperating  voluntarily 

lfThese  quotations,  as  well  as  those  following  on  pp.  79-80  are  from  "Democracy 
versus  the  Melting  Pot,"  Horace  S.  Kallen,  The  Nation,  May,  1915. 

The  articles  by  Randolph  Bourne  in  The  Menorah  Journal  and  Atlantic  Monthly  and 
other  newspaper  references  are  in  all  likelihood  inspired  by  this  article.  Dr.  Kallen  has 
elaborated  upon  the  ideas  of  nationality  implied  in  this  article  in  his  recent  book,  The 
Structure  of  Lasting  Peace,  which  applies  the  concept  to  the  general  world  situation. 
Without  going  into  greater  detail  at  this  point  it  is  suggested  that  the  notion  is  more 
applicable  to  the  international  relations  of  European  peoples,  where  distinct  peoples 
are  discernible  occupying  definite  territorities.  In  America  there  are  no  distinct  nations 
holding  definite  territorities  in  the  same  sense.  The  "Poale  Zion  Yiddishist  Nationa- 
lists" have  this  conception  of  nationality  as  the  background  of  their  philosophy.  See 
Zhitlowski,  Oesammelie  Schriften.  See  also  Zimmern,  Nationality  and  Government. 


80  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION1" 

and  autonomously  in  the  enterprise  of  self-realization  through  the 
perfection  of  men  according  to  their  kind."  No  very  clear  idea 
of  the  limitations  of  such  a  government  is  given,  but  it  is  emphasized 
that  the  unity  of  America  should  be  of  a  politico-economic  nature. 
English,  too,  is  to  be  a  common  language,  in  the  sense  of  a  lingua 
franca  necessitated  by  the  politico-economic  unity.  For  the  expres- 
sion of  its  cultural  and  spiritual  life,  however,  each  group  will  depend 
upon  the  ethnic  language,  literature,  social  life  and  religion,  for  it 
is  only  through  some  ethnic  form  corresponding  to  the  ethnic  original 
racial  endowment  that  true  culture  and  spiritual  life  can  exist.  From 
this  it  may  be  implied  that  education  should  be  controlled  by  the 
ethnic  group,  and  this  is  the  idea  tacitly  held  by  some  of  the  Yiddish- 
ist  protagonists  of  the  national-culture  idea.  Throughout  the  scheme 
proposed  prevails  the  analogy  of  a  federation  such  as  is  found  in 
Switzerland  where  three  nationalities  with  distinct  languages  and 
cultures  are  joined  harmoniously  under  one  government.  "Ameri- 
can Civilization  is  to  be  conceived  of  as  the  unified  resultant  of  the 
separate  cultures  existing  side  by  side  as  distinct  entities." 

"Thus  'American  Civilization'  may  come  to  mean  the  perfection 
of  the  cooperative  harmonies  of  'European  civilization,'  the  waste, 
the  squalor,  and  the  distress  of  Europe  being  eliminated — a  multi- 
plicity in  a  unity,  an  orchestration  of  mankind.  As  in  an  orchestra 
every  type  of  instrument  has  its  specific  timbre  and  tonality,  founded 
in  its  substance  and  form;  as  every  type  has  its  appropriate  theme 
and  melody  in  the  whole  symphony,  so  in  society  each  ethnic  group 
is  the  natural  instrument,  its  spirit  and  culture  are  its  theme  and 
melody,  and  the  harmony  and  dissonances  and  discords  of  them  all 
make  the  symphony  of  civilization,  with  this  difference:  a  musical 
symphony  is  written  before  it  is  played;  in  the  symphony  of  civiliza- 
tion the  playing  is  the  writing,  so  that  there  is  nothing  so  fixed  and 
inevitable  about  its  progression  as  in  music,  so  that  within  the  limits 
set  by  nature  they  may  vary  at  will,  and  the  range  and  variety  of  the 
harmonies  may  become  wider  and  richer  and  more  beautiful." 

In  this  conception  of  cooperating  but  distinct  cultures  the  pro- 
ponents believe  themselves  to  be  representing  a  line  of  thought  which 
is  in  harmony  with  the  progress  of  democracy.  They  point  out  the 


THEORIES   OF   ETHNIC   ADJUSTMENT  81 

close  connection  between  religious  beliefs  and  cultural  ideals,  and 
argue  that  the  modern  formula  cuius  regio  huius  natio  is  as  arbitrary 
and  as  oppressive  as  the  eighteenth  century  cuius  regio  huius  religio. 
They  plead  that  freedom  to  develop  one's  own  culture  is  as  primary 
a  right  as  is  freedom  to  believe  in  the  doctrines  of  one's  own  church. 
It  must  be  remembered  that  these  nationalists  always  interpret 
nationality  in  psychological,  not  political  terms — in  desire  to  promote 
literature,  art  and  beliefs.  They  do,  however,  maintain  that  there 
is  between  birth  and  culture  a  definitely  relevant  relation  and  tend 
to  look  upon  culture  as  national  in  its  character. 

The  'Federation  of  Nationalities'  theory  has  undoubtedly  served  a 
purpose  in  offering  a  striking  challenge  to  the  easy-going  assumptions 
of  the  total  assimilationists.  It  brings  to  the  fore  considerations 
which  the  first  two  theories  have  failed  to  reckon  with.  However, 
whatever  may  be  the  final  conclusion  with  reference  to  the  desirability 
of  maintaining  the  identity  of  the  ethnic  group  within  the  state, 
the  grounds  upon  which  such  a  conclusion  is  to  rest  must  be  other 
than  what  is  implied  in  the  scheme  of  thought  underlying  the  'Fed- 
eration of  Nationalities'  idea.  The  theory  is  based  on  the  assumption 
of  the  ineradicable  and  central  influence  of  race.  That  race  in 
the  sense  of  ethnic  affiliation  is  the  all  important  and  predestinat- 
ing fact  in  the  We  of  the  individual,  or  that  it  ought  to  be  if  the 
individual  is  to  fully  realize  himself,  cannot  be  upheld  either  from 
a  logical  analysis  of  what  the  term  'race'  can  mean  or  from  any 
examination  of  the  facts  at  our  disposal  of  the  influence  of  race  on  the 
life  of  the  individual. 

What  lends  the  color  of  plausibility  to  such  statements  of  the  prime 
importance  of  race  as  is  implied  in  the  expression,  "Selfhood  is 
ancestrally  determined"  is  a  vagueness  and  equivocality  in  the  mean- 
ing of  the  word  'race.'  Sometimes  it  is  used  in  the  sense  that  the 
biologist  or  psychologist  most  often  employs  it,  in  the  sense  of  actual 
heredity,  i.e.,  the  original  nature  of  individuals  as  against  acquired 
characteristics.  In  this  sense  the  word  is  abstract  and  has  no  plural. 
At  other  times  the  word  is  used  in  the  sense  of  the  anthropologist 
denoting  a  group  of  human  beings  classified  together  on  the  basis  of 
some  physical  resemblance  in  stature,  head  shape,  eye  color,  etc. 


82  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

There  is  indeed  an  assumption  that  the  general  outward  resemblance 
hints  at  some  common  origin;  but  it  must  be  remembered  that  the 
classification  is  made  on  the  basis  of  the  physical  resemblances; 
nothing  is  really  known  of  the  actual  origin.  In  this  sense  the  word 
is  concrete  and  has  a  plural  and  in  fact  can  only  be  thought  of  in 
connection  with  the  possibility  of  differentiated  groups.1  Now, 
saying  that  heredity  in  the  sense  of  the  original  endowment  of  the 
nervous  system  is  far  more  important  than  environment  (in  reference 
to  some  things  and  in  some  ways)  is  a  different  thing  from  saying 
that  the  ethnic  group  to  which  one  belongs,  according  to  some  anthro- 
pologists, should  decide  absolutely  for  each  individual  what  place  he 
shall  hold  in  society. 

'This  error  of  double  and  equivocal  usage  is  excellently  illustrated  in  a  recent  work 
on  the  importance  of  the  Nordic  race  for  European  civilization,  and  the  calamity  that 
awaits  us  because  (as  the  author  claims)  it  is  passing  away.  (The  Passing  of  the  Great 
Race,  Madison  Grant).  A  special  preface  explains  the  importance  of  the  book  in  that 
it  is  an  interpretation  of  history  in  terms  of  'race'.  "European  history  has  been  written 
in  terms  of  nationality  and  of  language,  but  never  before  in  terms  of  race;  yet  race  has 
played  a  far  larger  part  than  either  language  or  nationality  in  moulding  the  destinies 
of  men;  race  implies  heredity  and  heredity  implies  all  the  moral,  social  and  intellectual 
characteristics  and  traits  which  are  the  springs  of  politics  and  government.  Quite 
independently  and  unconsciously  the  author,  never  before  a  historian,  has  turned  this 
historical  sketch  into  the  current  of  a  great  biological  movement,  which  may  be  traced 
back  to  the  teachings  of  Gallon  and  Weismann,  beginning  in  the  kst  third  of  the  nine- 
teenth century.  This  movement  has  compelled  us  to  recognize  the  superior  force  and 
stability  of  heredity,  as  being  more  enduring  and  potent  than  environment."  Evi- 
dently the  writer  of  the  preface  used  the  word  'race'  in  the  sense  that  a  biologist  or  a 
psychologist  would  use  it,  in  the  sense  of  heredity,  i.e.  original  nature  of  the  individual 
as  against  acquired  characteristics.  The  author  of  the  work,  however,  throughout 
the  body  of  the  book  carries  on  the  discussion  of  the  term  'race'  in  the  sense  that  the 
anthropologist  would  use  it.  The  author,  holding  for  the  most  part  consistently  to  the 
anthropological  usage,  tacitly  assuming  an  inevitable  relationship  between  the  two 
meanings  of  the  word  'race',  nevertheless  in  one  place  patently  commits  the  fallacy  of 
the  double  meaning  within  the  scope  of  a  single  paragraph.  "This  something  which  we 
call  'Genius'  is  not  a  matter  of  family,  but  of  stock  or  strain,  and  is  inherited  precisely 
in  the  same  manner  as  are  the  purely  physical  characters.  It  may  be  latent  through 
several  generations  of  obscurity  and  then  flare  up  when  the  opportunity  comes.  Of 
this  we  may  have  many  examples  in  America.  This  is  what  education  does  for  a 
community;  it  permits  in  these  rare  cases  fair  play  for  development,  but  it  is  race, 
always  race,  that  produces  genius.  An  individual  of  inferior  type  or  race  may  profit 
greatly  by  good  environment.  On  the  other  hand  a  member  of  a  superior  Race  in 
bad  surroundings  may  and  often  does  sink  to  an  extremely  low  level."  Where  the  word 
race  has  been  put  in  italics  (which  are  mine),  it  is  used  in  the  sense  of  heredity;  in  the 
last  case,  placed  in  bold  faced  type,  the  author  by  introducing  the  indefinite  article  a 
has  easily  slipped  into  the  meaning  of  a  group  of  men  supposedly  with  the  same  origin. 
Throughout  the  book  the  author  assumes  that  there  are  superior  races  and  that  to  be  a 
member  of  them  is  the  very  significant  matter.  Most  of  the  arguments  about  race 
superiority  have  at  bottom  committed  this  fallacy. 


THEORIES   OF   ETHNIC    ADJUSTMENT  83 

Now  the  proposition  that  race  is  more  important  than  environ- 
ment, or  that  it  is  important  at  all,  would  depend  for  its  truth  upon 
the  sense  in  which  the  term  'race'  is  used.  If  race  here  means  an 
ethnic  group,  it  is  in  all  likelihood  false;  if  race  means  heredity  it  is 
with  limitations  true.  All  that  biologists  mean  when  they  say  that 
heredity  is  more  important  than  environment  is  that  seeing  an 
eminent  person  we  should  ascribe  that  eminence  to  some  gift  of  origi- 
nal nature  rather  than  to  some  process  of  training  or  to  circumstances 
alone,  i.e.,  put  another  man  through  the  same  course  of  education 
and  the  same  environment  and  he  will  not  become  eminent;  on  the 
other  hand  take  an  individual  with  good  original  endowment  and  put 
him  anywhere  and  he  will  become  a  somebody  in  the  minds  and 
opinion  of  his  fellows.  Few  would  maintain  that  a  man's  vocation 
is  determined  wholly  by  original  nature  and  even  fewer  perhaps  that 
the  language  a  man  speaks  and  the  church  with  which  he  is  affiliated 
are  determined  by  his  original  nature.  The  proposition  does  not 
mean  that  two  individuals  of  the  same  heredity  will  not  be  vastly 
different,  absolutely  considered,  whether  they  are  born  and  develop 
in  Germany  or  in  the  United  States.  It  does  not  mean  that  a  genius 
brought  up  among  savages  will  in  absolute  achievement  equal  the 
average  man  in  a  highly  civilized  state.  In  this  sense  and  with  such 
limitations  it  is  true  that  race  (i.e.,  heredity,  original  endowment) 
is  more  important  than  environment. 

In  the  other  sense,  of  a  group  with  identical  or  closely  related 
ancestry,  the  statement  that  race  is  all  important  in  determining 
the  status  of  the  individual  in  all  likelihood  is  false.  Every  serious 
study  has  demonstrated1  that  variability  within  one  race  and  over- 
lapping between  races  are  so  great  that  one  can  prophesy  nothing  with 
any  degree  of  certainty  about  the  original  endowment  of  an  individual 
from  the  one  fact  of  his  ethnic  origin.  There  are  differences,  but  the 
similarities  are  far  in  excess  of  the  differences  to  such  a  degree  that 
among  European  peoples  the  mass  of  each  group  is  in  original  nature 

1For  the  relationship  between  race  and  culture,  see  Robert  H.  Lowie,  Culture  and 
Ethnology;  Franz  Boas,  The  Mind  of  Primitive  Man;  Gustav  Spiller,  in  Sociological 
Review,  "Science  and  Race  Prejudice;  Franz  Boas,  Changes  in  Bodily  Form  of  Descend- 
ants of  Immigrants;  Gustav  Spiller,  The  Interracial  Congress;  Edward  Thorndike, 
Individual  Differences,  Vol.  Ill  in  Educational  Psychology. 


84  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

indistinguishable  from  the  mass  of  any  other  group.  While  the 
influence  of  the  near  ancestry,  i.e.,  the  family,  seems  to  be  potent, 
the  influence  of  the  remote  ancestry  is  practically  negligible  in 
determining  the  gifts  of  the  individual.  Thorndike,  summing  up 
the  evidence  on  the  influence  of  remote  ancestry  (race)  in  reference 
to  education,  expresses  the  relations  as  follows:  "Calling  the  dif- 
ference between  the  original  capacity  of  the  lowest  congenital  idiot 
and  that  of  the  average  modern  European  100,  I  should  expect  the 
average  deviation  of  one  pure  race  from  another  in  original  capacity 
to  be  below  10  and  above  1,  and  the  difference  between  the  central 
tendencies  of  the  most  gifted  and  the  least  gifted  races  to  be  below  50 
and  above  10.  I  should  consider  3  and  25  as  reasonable  guesses  for 
the  two  differences.  Even  if  the  differences  were  far  larger  than  these, 
the  practical  precept  for  education  would  remain  unchanged.  It  is,  of 
course,  that  selection  by  race  of  original  natures  to  be  educated  is  nowhere 
nearly  as  effective  as  selection  of  the  superior  individuals  regardless  of 
race.  There  is  much  overlapping  and  the  differences  in  original 
nature  within  the  same  race  are,  except  in  extreme  cases,  many  times 
as  great  as  the  differences  between  races  as  wholes."1 

It  is  not  difficult  to  understand  why  this  great  variability  within 
each  race  and  overlapping  between  races  exist.  If  each  human  being 
had  only  one  trait  and  each  race  was  differentiated  from  every  other 
race  in  reference  to  that  one  trait,  then,  granted  that  such  was  the 
case  at  the  beginning  of  things  and  that  no  intermarriage  has  taken 
place  since,  every  individual  of  one  race  would  possess  the  trait  in 
the  form  appropriate  to  his  race.  Every  member  of  a  race  A  would 
have  trait  A  and  every  member  of  race  B  would  have  trait  B,  no 
member  of  race  A  could  have  trait  B  and  no  member  of  race  B  could 
have  trait  A;  and  granting  further  that  a  trait  could  exist  only  in 
one  amount  or  one  degree,  there  would  be  no  divergences  within  the 
race  group.  The  traits,  however,  which  we  have  in  mind  are  very 
numerous,  the  degrees  in  which  they  are  present  highly  variable. 
Even  if  at  the  beginning  of  things  there  were  pure  races2  intermarriage 
has  taken  place  among  all  races  that  now  inhabit  Eurasia  and  there  are 

irThorndike,  Educational  Psychology,  Vol.  Ill,  Chap.  X,  p.  224  (italics  mine). 
*It  would  of  course  be  going  far  to  assume  that  the  various  subdivisions  of  the  white 
race  had  separate  and  distinct  origins. 


THEORIES    OF    ETHNIC   ADJUSTMENT  85 

no  pure  strains.  Even  such  a  comparatively  pure  race  as  the  Jews 
are  supposed  to  be1  is  undoubtedly  a  highly  mixed  race.  They  inter- 
married in  Biblical  times  and  throughout  the  diaspora  with  proselytes 
to  Judaism  and  thus  the  racial  elements  entering  into  any  modern  Jew 
are  highly  complex.2  Even  in  the  case  of  the  Jews,  then,  it  would  be 
very  surprising  to  find  a  definitive  line  of  demarcation  between  all 
Jews  and  all  non-Jews.  One  would  expect  to  find,  as  is  certainly  the 
case,  no  mutual  exclusiveness  in  the  original  nature  of  Jew  and  non- 
Jew. 

It  may  be  argued,  however,  that  the  important  differences  are  those 
of  emotional  reaction  and  desire,  and  that  the  conclusions  cited 
above  are  the  results  of  experiments  on  other  than  these  characteristics. 
Separate  measurements  of  simple  mental  traits,  it  may  be  urged,  are 
not  adequate  for  the  determination  of  what  the  large  important  total 
reactions  may  be,  and  no  adequate  experiments  have  as  yet  been 
made  in  reference  to  these  more  complex  functions.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  should  be  noted  that  no  experiments  have  proved  the  contrary, 
namely  that  the  members  of  a  race  resemble  each  other  very  closely 
in  some  things  in  which  they  are  very  much  differentiated  from  other 
races.  Discounting  for  environmental  influences,  whatever  evidence 
we  have  will  insist  on  a  great  divergence  within  each  race  in  reference 
to  any  point  that  one  might  measure,  be  it  virtue  or  vice,  riches  or 
poverty,  intelligence  or  stupidity;  business  ability,  musical  ability, 
manual  skill;  vocations,  politics,  pleasures.  Whatever  special 
tendencies  there  are  among  various  ethnic  groups  can  far  more  easily 
be  traced  to  social  pressure  or  environmental  circumstances  or  to  a 
slight  racial  difference. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  contention  here  is  not  that  racial  distinctions 
do  not  exist  at  all  or  that  being  small  they  are  not  very  important 
for  the  development  of  any  group  as  a  whole  in  comparison  with 
another  group  as  a  whole.  In  all  likelihood,  racial  differences  have 
played  their  part  working  through  environmental  and  historical  forces 

1On  good  grounds  because  intermarriage  is  forbidden  by  religious  laws  and  is 
contrary  to  the  social  opinion.  In  addition  those  who  intermarry  generally  cease  to 
maintain  the  Jewish  tradition;  those  who  are  Jews  are  thus  the  selected  non-inter- 
married Jews. 

2Arthur  Ruppin,  The  Jews  of  To-day. 


86  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

to  create  distinctive  cultures  and  to  give  some  nations  superiority 
over  others.  However,  differences  of  habitat,  of  vocation,  of  political 
institutions,  of  the  'zeitgeist'  and  social  atmosphere  also  have 
great  influence  in  deciding  the  characters  of  men  in  a  profound 
way.  Tribal  origin  is  at  most  only  one  of  the  many  factors  which 
combine  to  form  the  personality.  It  is  the  conception  that  ethnic 
differences  are  the  basic  matters  in  the  life  of  each  member  of  the  ethnic 
group,  that  the  ethnic  differences  are  primary,  ineradicable  because 
natural,  while  all  other  differences,  those  of  environment  and  acquired, 
are  secondary  and  changeable  because  artifacts,  which  the  argument 
opposes. 

It  must  be  recalled  that  the  differences  between  one  culture  and 
another  when  both  are  on  a  high  plane  of  development  are  after  all 
differences  in  quality  or  degree.  The  distinction  between  Jewishness 
and  Anglo-Saxonism  is  a  difference  comparable  to  the  difference 
between  Russian  music  and  Italian  music  rather  than  to  the  differ- 
ence between  music  and  no  music.  Let  us  imagine  that  a  band  of 
children,  the  offspring  of  gifted  musicians  are  transported  to  a 
country  in  which  no  music  exists;  their  musical  souls  would  in  all 
likelihood  remain  unsatisfied  until  they  had  created  some  music  to 
live  by.  Had  the  band  been  transported  from  Russia  to  Italy,  rich 
in  musical  tradition,  the  children  would  have  been  none  the  wiser, 
and  would  have  had  full  latitude  for  self-expression.  Indeed  some 
rare  genius  of  the  Russian  soul,  it  is  conceivable,  if  he  had  happened 
to  be  among  them,  would  have  broken  the  chains  of  the  foreign 
tradition  and  have  revealed  his  primordial  origin.  The  average, 
however,  would  have  taken  the  forms  and  spirit  of  the  new  nationality. 
So,  too,  the  average  Jew,  brought  up  in  an  Anglo-Saxon  environment, 
would  have  ample  opportunity  for  self-expression,  no  matter  what 
one  assumes  the  Jewish  genius  to  be,  money-making,  abstract  religion, 
mysticism,  or  a  passion  for  social  justice. 

But  he  would  not  have  reached  his  full  self-realization,  one  might 
urge.  Such  an  objection,  however,  takes  for  granted  two  matters 
which  are  open  to  question.  In  the  first  place,  such  a  conception 
takes  for  granted  that  every  Jew  is  a  Jew,  i.e.,  that  every  person 
born  in  a  Jewish  family  has  the  peculiar  original  endowment  which 


THEORIES   OF   ETHNIC   ADJUSTMENT  87 

makes  Jewishness  the  only  ultimate  and  complete  satisfier.  By  origi- 
nal nature  probably  most  Jews  can  fit  into  one  culture  as  well  as 
into  another  culture  just  as  most  men  are  not  born  to  any  vocation 
but  fit  equally  poorly  or  equally  well  into  a  number.  There  are 
some  men  who  are  born  to  be  musicians,  or  artists,  or  lawyers,  or 
statesmen;  but  these  are  the  exceptions,  the  men  above  the  average. 
Most  men  have  no  special  vocation;  perhaps  nearly  all  men  can  adjust 
themselves  equally  well  within  a  certain  type  of  work.  The  majority 
are  mediocrities  and  nondescripts.  So,  too,  most  Jews  are  mediocri- 
ties and  nondescripts  in  reference  to  their  Jewishness.  They  can  turn 
to  any  environment  within  the  range  of  European  civilization  with 
equal  facility.  In  fact  their  facility  to  adapt  themselves  is  as  pro- 
verbial as  their  ethnic  tenacity.  Those  whose  Jewish  spirit  is  like  a 
"fire  burning  within  their  bones"  are  few  and  far  between. 

In  the  second  place,  granting  that  there  is  a  Jewish  'genius'  and 
that  most  Jews  possess  at  least  a  spark  of  it,  is  it  necessary  to  assume 
that  the  present  Jewish  religion  and  culture,  the  evolved  institutions 
of  the  Jewish  spirit,  comprise  the  true  Jewishness?  There  are  and 
have  been  many  kinds  of  Judaisms.  Since  all  historical  expressions 
of  a  people's  soul  are  of  necessity  only  compromises  with  certain 
environmental  circumstances  and  historical  happenings  and  the  true 
embodiment  is  continually  developing  and  growing,  whatever 
Jewishness  we  have  to-day  is  inevitably  imperfect.  May  not,  there- 
fore, another  culture,  say  Americanism,  though  itself  no  complete 
expression  of  the  tendencies  which  have  created  Jewish  life,  be  a 
better  embodiment  than  any  of  the  particular  forms  which  the  force 
of  historical  circumstances  has  permitted  to  the  Jewish  genius? 
Certainly,  some  aspects  of  American  life  many  would  agree  are  more 
in  accord  with  the  spirit  of  the  Hebrew  Prophets  than  some  aspects 
of  traditional  Judaism. 

Before  a  doctrine  of  ethnic  predestination  can  become  tenable, 
it  is  necessary  to  hold  that  each  member  of  the  ethnic  group  possesses 
the  ethnic  genius,  so  that  no  other  form  of  culture  can  bring  him 
salvation,  and,  secondly,  that  the  historical  expression  of  the  ethnic 
culture  is  more  in  accord  with  the  ethnic  soul  than  any  other  culture 
to  which  the  individual  may  attach  himself.  The  only  way  the  former 


88  THEORIES   OF  AMERICANIZATION 

could  be  proved  would  be  by  permitting  the  member  of  the  ethnic 
group  to  come  into  contact  with  more  than  one  type  of  culture  and 
to  learn  to  which  he  tends  to  gravitate.  The  latter  can  only  be 
demonstrated  by  watching  the  development  of  the  ethnic  group 
under  conditions  which  guarantee  social  autonomy.  Of  the  two,  the 
writer  believes  the  first  to  be  relatively  untrue  and  the  second  rela- 
tively true.  These  two  large  social  experiments  will  be  tried  out 
in  the  coming  generations;  the  second  in  Palestine  if  the  Jews  are 
restored  as  a  self-governing  people;  the  first  in  the  diaspora,  and 
especially  in  America,  as  will  be  the  endeavor  to  show  in  the  discus- 
sion of  the  'Community'  theory  of  adjustment  presented  in  the  next 
chapter.  The  conclusion  that  race  in  the  sense  of  ethnic  affiliation 
is  no  inevitable  determinant  of  individual  character  would  prevent 
us  from  fixing  conditions  in  this  country  in  such  a  way  that  the  ethnos 
should  have  a  predominating  influence. 

Perhaps  the  foregoing  long  argument  is  unnecessary  to  show  that 
the  epigram,  "We  cannot  change  our  grandfathers,"  is  but  a  sophism. 
A  moment's  reflection  would  show  that  we  can  "change  our  grand- 
fathers," and  in  two  specific  ways.  In  the  first  place,  when  a  man 
forgets  who  his  grandfathers  were  and  neglects  their  traditions,  i.e., 
fails  to  retain  the  characteristics  which  marked  his  grandfathers  and 
adopts  other  models,  to  all  intents  and  purposes  he  "changes  his 
grandfather."  Our  grandfathers  are  psychological  as  well  as  physi- 
cal. What  we  are  depends  not  only  upon  our  original  nature  but  also 
upon  its  interaction  with  the  environment.  To  think  of  the  nature 
of  an  individual  as  something  independent  of  his  environment  is  to 
be  guilty  of  an  impossible  dualism.  Since  beliefs  and  traditions  and 
manner  of  social  life  are  part  of  the  environment,  any  change  in  these 
from  the  standards  of  our  grandfathers  is  in  reality  a  "change"  of 
our  grandfathers.  In  the  second  place  (since  we  are  considering 
groups)  grandfathers  can  be  changed  through  intermarriage.  Any 
individual  who  marries  outside  of  his  group  is  thereby  changing  the 
ancestry  of  his  children.  To  what  degree  intermarriage  is  going  on 
is  a  matter  that  needs  to  be  ascertained  through  study;  but  that  it  is  a 
possibility  is  open  to  no  question.1 

'Dr.  Arthur  Ruppin  statistically  proves  the  increase  of  intermarriage  in  Europe 
with  the  removal  of  social-economic  deterrents.  Julius  Drachsler  has  shown 


THEORIES   OF    ETHNIC    ADJUSTMENT  89 

The  contention  of  ethnic  stability  does  not  seem  to  be  borne  out 
either  by  the  theoretical  discussion  or  by  the  facts  in  so  far  as  they 
have  been  ascertained.  Wherever  one  ethnic  group  of  the  white 
race  tends  to  remain  separated  from  another,  cultural,  political  and 
religious  factors  are  the  impediments,  not  racial  characteristics. 
The  objection  to  a  scheme  of  organization  like  the  'Federation  of 
Nationalities'  theory  rests,  however,  not  only  on  the  conclusion  that 
its  hypothesis  of  racial  predestination  is  false,  but  also  on  the  ground 
that  such  a  scheme  of  organization  would  fail  to  satisfy  in  full  measure 
our  democratic  criteria. 

To  regard  every  individual  of  an  ethnic  group  as  having  primarily 
the  characteristic  nature  of  that  group,  as  if  affiliation  with  it  invested 
him  with  a  particular  kind  of  ethnicity  which  then  determined  his 
nature,  is  contrary  to  the  doctrine  that  each  individual  structure  is 
primary.  To  assume  that  he  is  what  his  group  is,  and  that  solely 
or  even  primarily,  is  to  apply  to  him  something  in  the  nature  of  a 
transcendental  standard.  If,  indeed,  after  permitting  him  freedom  of 
action,  the  individual  shows  tendencies  that  align  him  with  his  ethnic 
group,  he  can  be  rightly  conceived  of  as  sharing  in  its  nature.  To 
take  for  granted  that  he  does  so  share  the  character  of  the  ethnic 
group  and  to  proceed  to  mould  his  life  from  that  point  of  view  solely 
is  to  apply  to  him  an  external  standard.  Undoubtedly  an  individual 
may  be  influenced  by  the  character  of  his  remote  ancestry.  But  before 
governmental  organization  can  be  permitted  to  make  ethnic  origin 
the  central  consideration,  there  must  be  overwhelming  proof  of  its 
importance.  Otherwise  such  a  scheme  of  government  cannot  help 
but  artifically  make  race  a  greater  factor  than  it  deserves  to  be, 
leading  to  a  repression  of  the  individual,  a  lessening  of  the  possible 
opportunities  of  a  variety  of  type  of  living  and  an  insufficient  realiza- 
tion of  his  responsibilities  to  the  larger  group  of  which  he  is  a  part. 

Now,  undoubtedly,  a  member  of  a  foreign  ethnic  group  within 
the  United  States  has  interests  which  cross  the  boundaries  of  his 


that  the  rate  of  intermarriage  is  very  great  for  all  groups  in  New  York  City  except 
in  the  case  of  the  Jews,  that  all  the  foreign  ethnic  groups  are  breaking  down  with  the 
exception  of  the  Jews.  Even  in  the  case  of  the  Jews  intermarriage  is  on  the  increase 
in  the  second  generation.  Both  are  at  one  in  the  conclusion  that  social  and  economic 
forces  and  acquired  habits  are  between  the  white  groups  the  only  barriers  to  intermar- 
riage. The  race  element  is  ineffective. 


90  THEORIES   OP   AMERICANIZATION 

particular  group,  and  which  he  holds  in  common  with  members  of 
other  ethnic  group.  In  his  economic  activity,  in  his  politics,  and 
even  in  his  general  outlook  on  life,  he  has  relationships  with  a  wider 
range  of  persons  than  those  which  comprise  his  own  group.  He  is 
as  likely  as  not  to  be  at  variance  in  some  of  these  matters  with  other 
members  of  his  own  ethnic  group.  To  make  the  ethnic  group  the 
main  basis  of  organization  within  the  larger  unit  would  in  a  sense 
make  all  of  these  other  factors  subservient  to  the  ethnic  consideration. 
For  with  autonomy  of  the  ethnic  group  would  have  to  go  partial 
segregation  and  power  over  the  school  system.  The  free  play  of 
divergent  currents,  which  the  community  of  interests  in  America 
should  demand,  would  be  interfered  with.  Such  an  organization, 
a  federation  of  ethnic  groups,  would  lead  to  sectionalism,  a  condition 
in  which  a  group  decides  issues  affecting  also  other  groups  mainly 
from  its  narrower  group  outlook.  Here  sectionalism  would  be  ethnic. 
The  ethnic  relationship  would  limit  the  view,  as  does  the  territorial 
alignment  in  local  sectionalism. 

Another  way  of  saying  this  would  be  that  ethnic  automony  would 
lead  to  indoctrination.  A  man's  ethnic  groupings  would  determine, 
fix,  also  his  other  relationships  to  the  other  members  of  the  State. 
One  factor  in  a  man's  life  must  certainly  influence,  but  should  not  deter- 
mine the  other  factors.  Democracy  is  essentially  opposed  to  deter- 
minism, either  by  physical  force  or  by  any  other  extrinsic  or  not  fully 
related  fact  of  life.  Democracy  does  not  oppose  (as  indeed  it  cannot) 
the  influence  of  heredity,  or  church,  or  economic  class;  but  it  asserts 
that  these  must  not  have  undue  influence  made  possible  by  artificial 
organization  of  society.  Since  life  is  wider  than  any  oneof  thesefactors, 
the  rights  of  the  individual  in  society  must  not  be  altogether  deter- 
mined by  any  one  of  these.  So,  too,  when  we  would  segregate  our 
children  in  the  schools  on  the  basis  of  nationality,  we  would  tend  to 
make  one  factor  in  the  complex  situation  determine  all  other  relation- 
ships to  their  fellow  American  citizens.  In  effect,  the  possible  oppor- 
tunities of  coming  in  contact  with  divergent  currents  would  be  artifi- 
cially limited. 

Furthermore,  wherever  unities  of  an  economic  and  political  nature 
do  not  lead  also  to  cultural  unities,  to  participation  in  a  common 


THEORIES   OF    ETHNIC    ADJUSTMENT  91 

spiritual  life  which  rises  out  of  the  community  of  natural  conditions, 
the  most  significant  thing  has  been  irretrievably  lost.  In  the  real 
human  sense,  all  common  economic  and  political  activities  are  signifi- 
cant only  in  so  far  as  they  lead  to  a  finer  insight  into,  and  finer  appre- 
ciation of,  life.  To  earn  one's  livelihood  here  and  to  vote  here  may 
be  fair  rewards  for  American  citizenship.  The  great  opportunity 
will  be  missed,  however,  of  learning  the  significance  of  human  life 
as  it  reveals  itself  in  the  activities  and  in  the  thought  of  a  great 
country,  rich  in  natural  resources,  heterogeneous  in  its  racial  composi- 
tion, tolerant  and  open-minded  toward  life. 

But  is  it  not  possible,  one  may  protest,  to  conceive  of  the  new 
conditions  leading  to  growth  by  modifying  the  traditional  ethnic 
culture?  Indeed,  this  is  so;  but  such  a  conception  assumes  the  past 
of  the  race  to  be  the  Law,  and  the  new  experience  mainly  its  illustra- 
tion and  sometimes  its  amendment.  The  democratic  idea  of  culture 
demands  that  the  significances  spring  out  of  the  physical  and  practical 
life  of  the  day,  and  that  the  function  of  history  is  secondary.  Life 
is  the  author,  history  the  interpreter,  not  vice  versa.  The  notion  of 
the  hegemony  of  the  ethnic  group  tends  too  much  to  bend  the  present 
life  to  a  standard  created  by  the  past. 

The  simplest  and  therefore  most  telling  objection  to  this  type  of 
governmental  organization  for  the  United  States  is  the  recognition 
that  it  is  a  notion  imported  from  foreign  conditions  without  realizing 
that  the  very  considerations  which  make  it  valid  there  are  totally 
different  in  this  country.  The  analogy  of  a  Federation  of  Ethnic 
Groups  within  one  state  is  directly  inspired  by  the  situation  in  Switzer- 
land, the  British  Empire  and  the  old  Austria.  In  all  of  these  as  in 
the  United  States  there  is  a  heterogeneity  of  ethnic  types,  with  one 
set  of  essential  differences.  In  these  other  countries  each  ethnic 
group  is  fairly  well  defined  and  attached  to  particular  localities. 
The  land  was  in  all  cases  possessed  by  the  ethnic  group  before  the 
government  came  into  existence.  Together  with  this  common  ancient 
possession  of  the  soil  goes  a  community  of  language,  social  life  and 
nearly  always  a  common  religion.  The  language  of  general  social 
intercourse  and  the  language  of  the  street  are  the  folk  tongue.  The 
function  of  the  Federal  government  which  has  come  after  the  distinct 


92  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

existence  of  these  groups  promotes  intercommunication  and  common 
action  between  groups  hitherto  separated  and  sometimes  at  variance  with 
each  other. 

In  America  conditions  are  quite  different.  The  phenomenon  of 
attachment  of  the  various  ethnic  groups  to  certain  definite  localities 
from  ancient  times  is  altogether  missing.  Even  where  there  is 
the  gathering  of  groups  in  certain  spots,  we  must  remember  the 
important  distinctions.  In  the  first  place,  it  is  not  tenure  of  land 
that  holds  the  group  together,  but  certain  psycho-social  forces  which 
in  their  nature  of  acquired  characteristics  tend  to  disappear  with 
intercommunication.  In  the  second  place,  one  ethnic  group  will 
be  found  to  have  colonies  in  many  places;  it  is  not  settled  in  one 
centre.  The  populations  tend  to  be  rather  mobile  and  move  from 
place  to  place.  Even  in  the  specifically  foreign  quarters  the  second 
generation  tends  to  use  English  and  not  the  ethnic  tongue  as  the 
medium  of  expression.  The  children  in  the  streets  play  in  English. 
In  order  to  have  a  Federation  of  Nationalities  in  America  it  would 
be  necessary  to  separate  the  various  nationalities  and  then  organize 
them  on  the  basis  of  the  ethnos.  Such  a  procedure  would,  in  reference 
to  the  conditions  in  the  United  States,  illustrate  a  tendency  directly 
in  opposition  to  that  involved  in  federalization  in  the  case  of  the 
European  countries  named.  It  would  tend  to  impede  impenetrability 
rather  than  to  further  it.  In  reference  to  the  position  already 
attained  such  a  movement  would  be  a  step  backward  and  not  for- 
ward in  the  process  of  democratization.  The  analogy  to  European 
federations  does  not  hold  in  reference  to  the  central  and  relevant 
consideration.  The  conditions  in  America  have  no  exact  analogy 
and  the  solution  cannot,  therefore,  be  merely  a  copy  of  a  ready  made 
pattern.  The  task  is  to  create  an  adequate  mode  of  adjustment  which 
will  be  harmonious  with  the  novel  conditions  of  thought  and  life  pre- 
sented here. 

The  'Federation  of  Nationalities'  theory  has  been  treated  at  perhaps 
greater  length  than  its  practical  import  merits.  Even  among  the 
Jews  who  are  most  keen  in  their  desire  to  maintain  the  group  identity 
this  theory,  especially  in  the  literal  form  presented  here,  would  find 
comparatively  few  advocates.  Its  strength  lies  rather  in  its  negative 


THEORIES   OF   ETHNIC   ADJUSTMENT  93 

criticism  of  the  prevailing  theories  of  assimilation  than  in  its  positive 
suggestion.  Its  proponents  have  given  it  undue  force  through  excel- 
lent theoretical  presentation;  but  it  must  be  regarded  as  a  doctrinaire 
solution,  not  as  a  practical  plan. 

Both  the  'Americanization'  and  the  'Federation  of  Nationalities' 
theories  assume  too  much.  They  fix  to  an  unnecessary  degree  the 
end  for  which  the  individual  nature  exists.  The  'Americanization* 
theory  regards  the  life  of  the  country  to  be  fairly  well  determined 
and  insists  that  the  individual  must  bring  himself  within  the  limits 
of  the  evolved  and  dominant  type.  What  the  individual  should  be  is 
predetermined  altogether  by  the  conditions  of  the  geographical 
present.  The  'Federation  of  Nationalities'  theory  would  predispose, 
but  in  the  opposite  direction;  the  individual's  race  predetermines 
his  end.  Since  the  term  'race'  here  really  signifies  the  traditions  of  his 
ethnos,  it  in  the  end  amounts  to  giving  the  past  of  the  tribe  a  vested 
right  to  determine  the  future  of  the  individual.  In  both  cases  the 
cloth  is  to  be  cut  in  measure  with  some  preconceived  pattern. 
The  theory  to  be  offered  as  the  constructive  suggestion,  while  admit* 
ting  the  validity  of  both  these  forces,  would  endeavor  to  avoid 
exclusive  control  by  either.  To  permit  the  greatest  number  of  possi- 
bilities for  the  individual,  to  give  an  opportunity  to  all  of  these 
factors  to  function,  to  keep  the  future  as  flexible  as  is  compatible  with 
the  integrity  and  stability  of  the  total  society  will  be  the  underlying 
purpose  of  the  'Community'  theory  of  adjustment. 


THE  COMMUNITY  THEORY 


We  perceive  a  community  great  in  numbers,  mighty  in  power ;  enjoying 
life,  liberty  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness;  true  life,  not  mere  breathing 
space;  full  liberty,  not  mere  elbow  room;  real  happiness,  not  that  of 
pasture  beasts;  actively  participating  in  the  civic,  social  and  economic 
progress  of  the  country,  fully  sharing  and  increasing  its  spiritual  posses- 
sions and  acquisitions,  doubling  its  joys,  halving  its  sorrows;  yet  deeply 
rooted  in  the  soil  of  Judaism,  clinging  to  its  past,  working  for  its  future, 
true  to  its  traditions,  faithful  to  its  aspirations,  one  in  sentiment  with 
their  brethren  wherever  they  are,  attached  to  the  land  of  their  fathers  as  the 
cradle  and  resting  place  of  the  Jewish  spirit;  men  with  straight  backs 
and  raised  heads,  with  big  hearts  and  strong  minds,  with  no  conviction 
crippled,  with  no  emotion  stifled,  with  souls  harmoniously  developed, 
self-centered  and  self-reliant;  receiving  and  resisting,  not  yielding  like 
wax  to  every  impress  from  the  outside,  but  blending  the  best  they  possess 
with  the  best  they  encounter;  not  a  horde  of  individuals,  but  a  set  of 
individualities,  adding  a  new  note  to  the  richness  of  American  life,  leading 
a  new  current  into  the  stream  of  American  civilization;  not  a  formless 
crowd  of  taxpayers  and  voters,  but  a  sharply  marked  community,  distinct 
and  distinguished,  trusted  for  its  loyalty,  respected  for  its  dignity, 
esteemed  for  its  traditions,  valued  for  its  aspirations,  a  community  such 
as  the  Prophet  of  the  Exile  saw  in  his  vision:  "And  marked  will  be 
their  seed  among  the  nations,  and  their  off-spring  among  the  peoples. 
Everyone  that  will  see  them  will  point  to  them  as  a  community  blessed  by 

the  Lord." 

— ISRAEL  FRIEDLAENDER 


CHAPTER  III 

THE  COMMUNITY  THEORY 

The  'Community'  theory1  which  is  proposed  as  the  constructive 
suggestion  is  in  reality  the  formulation  of  a  process  already  shaping 
itself  among  some  of  our  immigrant  groups  as  a  result  of  the  con- 
fluence of  the  ethnic  will  to  live  with  the  conditions  of  American  life. 
To  the  writer  the  suggestion  has  come  from  the  experience  of  the 
Jewish  group;  and,  although  there  are  many  indications  of  this 
scheme  of  organization  among  other  immigrant  nationalities,  the  Jews 
have  undoubtedly  gone  furthest  in  its  development.  In  fact,  it  may 
be  regarded  as  the  response  of  the  Jewish  group  to  the  problem  of 
adjustment.  While  many  among  the  Jews  would  differ  with  our 
proposal  or  with  some  of  its  features,  the  tendency  of  Jewish  institu- 
tional development  would  indicate  that  the  'Community'  theory  is 
the  acceptable  mode  of  adjustment  for  the  Jewish  group  as  an  ethnic 
entity.  Confidence  in  the  validity  of  this  plan  should  be  the  greater 
because  it  represents  the  resultant  of  many  intricate  social  forces 
working  slowly  upon  each  other  under  democratic  conditions.  It 
will  be  apt  to  escape  the  basic  unsoundness  of  an  a  priori  plan  built 
upon  the  interest  of  certain  classes,  the  undiscerning  emotionalism 
misunderstood  as  patriotism  or  the  romantic  imagination  of  sociolog- 
ical litterateurs.  The  formulation  presented  below  comes  after  the 
process  and  is  an  attempt  to  build'  a  consistent  theory  out  of  disso- 
ciated methods  to  the  end  that  the  further  course  of  adjustment  may 
be  guided  more  directly  in  line  with  the  ideal.  Drawn  from  Jewish 
life,  it  will  undoubtedly  apply  most  closely  to  Jewish  life.  Neverthe- 
less, it  is  hoped  that  the  Jewish  experience  may  form  the  basis  of  a 

JSee  Horace  J.  Bridges,  On  becoming  an  American;  Julius  Drachsler,  Democracy  and 
Assimilation.  Such  an  attitude  is  perhaps  also  implied  in  "Nationalizing  Education" 
by  John  Dewey  (in  N.  E.  A.  Addresses  and  Proceedings,  1916);  and  Newer  Ideals  of 
Peace,  by  Jane  Addams.  The  underlying  philosophy  of  Jewish  life  upon  which  this 
theory  is  based  has  been  propounded  by  Ahad  Ha' Am;  though  he  does  not  develop  it 
with  special  reference  to  the  theory  of  adjustment  in  the  lands  of  the  Diaspora.  That 
has  been  done  with  special  reference  to  America  by  his  disciple  and  exponent,  the  late 
Professor  Israel  Friedlaender.  See  Past  and  Present,  A  Collection  of  Jewish  Essays, 
especially  Chaps.  XV,  XVI,  XVII,  XVIII,  XIX,  XXVI. 

97 


98  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

theory  of  adjustment  which  will  be  applicable  to  all  groups  which 
desire  to  maintain  their  ethnic  identity  in  the  conditions  of  democratic 
life  in  America. 

Like  the  'Federation  of  Nationalities'  theory,  our  position  insists  on 
the  value  of  the  ethnic  group  as  a  permanent  asset  in  American  life. 
The  'Community'  theory  differs  from  the  'Americanization'  and  'Melt- 
ing Pot'  theories  in  that  it  refuses  to  set  up  as  an  ideal  such  a  fusion  as 
will  lead  to  the  obliteration  of  all  ethnic  distinctions.  Furthermore, 
it  regards  a  rich  social  life  as  necessary  for  the  development  and 
expression  of  the  type  of  culture  represented  by  the  foreign  ethnic 
group.  There  is,  however,  a  fundamental  difference  in  what  is 
conceived  to  be  the  ultimate  sanction  for  maintaining  the  identity 
of  the  foreign  ethnic  group.  In  the  'Federation  of  Nationalities' 
theory  the  assumed  identity  of  race  is  pivotal;  the  argument  is  made 
to  rest  primarily  upon  the  proposition  that  "we  cannot  change  our 
grandfathers."  The  'Community'  theory,  on  the  other  hand,  would 
make  the  history  of  the  ethnic  group  its  aesthetic,  cultural  and  relig- 
ious inheritance,  its  national  self-consciousness  the  basic  factor. 
This  change  of  emphasis  from  race  to  culture  brings  with  it  a  whole 
series  of  implications  rising  from  the  fact  that  culture  is  psychical, 
must  be  acquired  through  some  educational  process,  and  is  not  in- 
herited in  the  natural  event  of  being  born.  The  'Community'  theory 
is  to  be  understood  as  an  analysis  of  what  is  implied  for  the  theory  of 
adjustment  by  considering  culture  as  central  in  the  life  of  the  ethnos. 
Community  of  culture  possible  of  demonstration  becomes  the  ground 
for  perpetuation  of  the  group,  rather  than  an  identity  of  race,  ques- 
tionable in  fact  and  dubious  in  significance. 

The  distinction  between  race  and  acquired  characteristics  shows 
itself  in  a  greatly  overemphasized  form  in  the  logomachy  which  has 
for  many  years  been  carried  on  between  the  extremists  of  the  Reform 
Movement  and  the  Modernist  Radical-Nationalists.  The  Reform 
position  maintains  that  "the  Jews  are  a  faith,  not  a  race."  Perhaps 
most  Jews  would  subscribe  to  such  a  pronouncement  if  the  term 
"faith"  were  made  broad  enough  and  interpreted  to  mean  a  kind  of 
life.  The  followers  of  Reform,  however,  anxious  to  become  as  near 
as  possible  to  the  nations  of  the  West,  adopted  Western  customs  and 


THE   COMMUNITY   THEORY  99 

modes  of  life  wholeheartedly  and  made  of  Jewishness  a  formal  creed 
to  which  one  might  maintain  a  sort  of  verbal  adherence  without 
changing  in  any  important  respect  the  content  of  life  or  thought. 
The  movement  toward  divesting  Jewishness  of  all  social  background 
and  leaving  it  a  bare,  attenuated  doctrine  finds  its  extreme  logical 
development  in  the  conception  that  Israel  has  been  dispersed  amongst 
the  nations  providentially,  for  the  purpose  of  teaching  "God  is  One." 
The  crystallization  of  Jewishness  into  a  phrase  permitted  the  growth 
of  the  illusion  that  one  could  live  any  type  of  life  and  remain  a  Jew 
by  giving  a  lip  allegiance  to  words.  Orthodoxy,1  as  it  develops  in 
Western  countries  among  German  Jews  and  Jews  who  have  lived  in 
America  for  some  length  of  time,  shows  a  similar  tendency  toward 
formalization.  But  instead  of  becoming  crystallized  into  abstract 
ideas,  orthodoxy  has  been  codified  into  religious  ceremonies  whose 
meaning  and  relation  to  life  are  little  understood.  Thus  the 'orthodox' 
Jew  can  become  assimilated  to  Western  modes  of  life  quite  as  much  as 
the  Reform  Jew  while  he  saves  his  soul  by  the  mechanical  performance 
of  the  Jewish  ritual.  Since  actions  and  customs  are  more  noticeable 
than  phrases  kept  in  the  mind,  differences  of  ceremonial,  as  for 
instance  the  keeping  of  the  Dietary  Laws,  often  impress  themselves 
more  readily  on  the  non-Jewish  mind.  These  external  peculiarities, 
however,  only  too  frequently  are  not  accompanied  by  any  distinct 
cultural  or  spiritual  life.  They  are  merely  social  conventions. 
There  is,  however,  an  element  of  fundamental  truth  in  the  tendency  to 
associate  Jewishness  with  'Religion,'  and  that  is  to  insist  that  Jewish 
life  must  have  a  spiritual  justification.  The  error  in  both  Reform 
and  Orthodoxy  seems  to  be  that  the  conception  of  'spiritual'  is  formal, 
sentimental,  and  abstracted  from  social  life. 

The  modernist  Radical-Nationalists,  impatient  with  codified 
formulations  of  the  spirit  and  aspirations  of  a  people,  especially  since 
these  formulations  had  been  embodied  in  'religious'  practices  and 
terminologies  on  account  of  historical  circumstance,  were  seeking  for 
something  underneath  and  below  these  crystallizations  of  custom 
which  had  become  encrusted  on  the  Jewish  organism,  for  something 

'Orthodoxy  as  a  creed  is  meant;  not  the  soda!  life  of  the  Russian  ghetto,  which  is 
often  called  'orthodox'  Judaism. 


100  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

motivating  and  spontaneous,  some  life  force  which  could  be  con- 
ceived as  manifesting  itself  throughout  history  in  a  variety  of  embodi- 
ments. They  did  not  blindly  worship  the  Western  World.  They 
had  confidence  that  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven  was  within  them  too. 
Looking  for  some  inherent  Protean  potentiality  rather  than  for  com- 
pleted excellence,  and  within  themselves  rather  than  in  the  environ- 
ment, they  fell  back  on  the  term  'race.'  Such  a  conception  of  identity 
in  race  leaves  room  for  progress  and  new  embodiments,  though  it 
tends  to  minimize  the  importance  of  history  and  what  has  already 
been  acquired. 

Jewish  tradition  and  with  it  the  Jewish  masses  speak  in  terms  of 
neither  'race'  nor  'religion.'1  Both  of  these  terms  are  imported  from 
the  Western  world  and  are  foreign  to  the  Jewish  spirit  as  terms 
description  of  Jewishness.  The  central  idea  in  Jewish  life  is  Torah. 
In  legend  and  in  literature,  it  is  for  the  sake  of  the  Torah  that  Israel 
was  called  into  being;  it  is  for  the  sake  of  the  Torah  that  Israel  has 
been  spared  annihilation.  Torah  is  a  word  of  many  connotations, 
ranging  from  the  usual  designation  of  the  Pentateuch  to  the  whole 
spiritual  life.2  It  was  the  Torah  that  was  revealed  from  Sinai.  It 
was  for  the  sake  of  the  Torah  that  Israel  entered  the  Promised  Land. 
It  was  because  Israel  sinned  against  the  Torah  that  he  was  exiled. 
It  was  for  teaching  the  Torah  that  Akibah  was  flayed  alive  by  the 
Romans.  It  was  the  Torah  that  was  burned  during  the  persecution 
in  the  mediaeval  dark  ages.  It  was  for  the  Torah  that  the  youth  of 
the  Russian  Jewish  ghetto  gave  up  all  worldly  interests  in  a  single- 
hearted  devotion  to  learning.  It  is  the  Torah  ultimately  that  is  to  go 
forth  from  Zion,  and  bring  about  Peace  and  the  Messianic  Age  for 
the  nations  of  the  earth.  Torah  is  the  basis  and  the  goal  of  Jewish 
life.  Interpret  it  as  narrowly  or  as  broadly  as  you  please,  the  central 
idea  is  Torah.  It  is  Jewishness,  the  spiritual  life,  and  Godliness, 
Kin  nn  wn  "jna  WFnpi  Krvnim  ta-ie*.  (The  Holy  One,  Blessed  be 
He,  the  Torah  and  Israel  are  one.) 

In  the  writings  of  the  Cultural  Zionists,  devoted  to  the  renascence 
of  Hebraic  life,  this  traditional  emphasis  upon  Torah  has  been  made 

'Israel  Friedlaender,  Past  and  Present,  essay  on  "Peace  and  Religion." 

'Solomon  Schechter,  Some  Atpects  of  Rabbinic  Theology.  Chaps.  VIII,  IX,  X,  XI. 


THE   COMMUNITY   THEORY  101 

the  central  thought.  The  idea  of  Torah  has  been  broadened  to  in- 
clude cultural  and  aesthetic  values  as  well  as  those  which  popular 
usage  identifies  as  'religious.'  The  fundamental  notion,  however, 
that  the  aspiration  of  Jewish  life  is  spiritual  remains  the  underlying 
conception  in  this  philosophy.  The  term  'history'  is  sometimes 
used  in  the  profound  sense  of  "Philosophy  teaching  by  example"  as 
the  interpretation  of  events  through  the  experience  of  the  human  race 
with  reference  to  human  aspirations.1  Torah,  we  may  say,  is  History 
in  this  broad  sense,  as  it  manifests  itself  in  the  life  experiences  of  the 
Jewish  people :  Culture  as  it  expresses  itself  in  the  rich  inheritance  of 
the  Jewish  people;  Philosophy  and  Religion  as  they  become  embodied 
in  the  social  and  spiritual  ideals  of  the  Jewish  People.  What  brings 
Jews  together  is  the  significance  and  power  of  Torah,  i.e.,  Jewish  His- 
tory, using  the  term  in  its  richest  sense. 

This  conception  which  identifies  the  Jewish  people  with  its  cultural 
and  spiritual  aspirations  comes  very  close  to  the  view  that  nationality 
is  essentially  a  psychological  force,  a  view  held  by  many  of  the 
protagonists  of  'national'  autonomy  for  the  smaller  nations  of  Europe. 
When  the  Serb  representative  at  the  Hungarian  Diet  of  1848  was 
asked,  "What  is  a  Nation?"  he  replied,  "A  race  which  possesses  its  own 
language,  customs,  culture  and  enough  self -consciousness  to  preserve 
them."  This  definition  of  nationality  in  cultural  terms  gives  the  clue 
to  the  solution  of  our  problem  of  harmonizing  two  nationalities 
dwelling  side  by  side.  The  essential  distinction  between  physical  and 
spiritual  goods  lies  in  mutual  exclusiveness  of  the  former  and  the 
permeability  of  the  latter.  Two  individuals,  however  close  their 
proximity,  cannot  enjoy  the  possession  of  the  same  physical  good.  A 
man  cannot  eat  an  apple  and  give  his  friend  the  apple.  If  they  desire 
to  share,  each  must  give  up  a  part.  Two  men  cannot  have  possession, 
in  the  strict  sense,  of  one  piece  of  land;  both  of  them  cannot  build  a 
house  on  the  same  spot.  Spiritual  goods,  however,  have  an  opposite 
character.  Many  people  can  listen  to  one  musical  composition, 
admire  one  picture,  read  one  book.  Indeed,  such  sharing  normally 
enhances  for  each  the  enjoyment  which  each  derives  from  the  use 
of  the  good  in  question.  Thus  a  group  which  has  as  a  common  pur- 

^oodbridge.  The  Purpose  of  History,  page  23. 


102  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

pose  the  acquisition  of  economic  goods,  may  be  in  great  danger  of 
coming  into  conflict  with  neighboring  groups  of  like  mind.  If,  how- 
ever, the  group  purpose  is  expressed  in  terms  of  spiritual  aspiration 
(unless,  indeed,  it  believes  that  it  is  necessary  to  impose  its  own 
culture  upon  other  groups  by  force)  there  is  no  innate  necessity  of 
conflict  in  the  ordinary  physical  sense;  rather  mutual  cooperation 
and  exchange  would  be  the  logical  outcome.  The  spiritualization  of 
the  purpose  of  nationality  is  the  most  important  factor  in  the  adjust- 
ment potentiality  of  groups  to  one  another.  It  points  to  a  possibility 
for  the  preservation  of  individuality  by  other  means  than  segregation, 
and  reveals  a  way  of  retaining  loyalty  both  to  the  cultural  life  of  the 
ethnic  group  and  to  the  life  of  the  total  group  in  all  its  aspects. 
Cultural  divergences  are  not  incompatible  with  allegiance  to  a  com- 
mon culture.  Two  cultures  have  possibilities  of  harmonization  which 
two  political  or  economic  independences  would  never  have. 

Accordingly,  the  'Community'  theory  of  adjustment  makes  culture 
the  raison  d'etre  of  the  preservation  of  the  life  of  the  group.  The 
School1  becomes  the  central  agency  around  which  the  ethnic  group 
builds  its  life.  In  accordance  with  our  theory,  the  Jews  are  con- 
ceived of  as  living  in  no  one  isolated  locality  but  scattered  throughout 
the  country  and  living  amongst  other  nationalities.  Together  with 
other  nationalities,  they  engage  in  commerce,  in  political  and  social 
life;  they  take  advantage  of  all  opportunities  for  educational  and 
cultural  development  offered  by  the  state,  they  fulfill  whatever 
responsibilities  citizenship  implies  even  as  understood  by  those  who 
have  no  other  loyalty  than  to  the  American  ethnos,  and  they  contrib- 
ute in  whatever  way  they  can  to  the  development  of  America,  in  all 
phases,  economic,  political  and  cultural.  Over  and  above  this 
participation  in  the  common  life  of  the  country,  wherever  Jews  live 
in  sufficient  numbers  to  make  communal  life  possible,  the  Jews  are 
conceived  of  having  their  own  communal  life  organized  with  a  view 
to  the  preservation  of  that  which  is  essential  in  the  life  of  the  Jewish 
people — the  Torah. 


'The  word  School  is  used  throughout  to  signify  an  educational  agency  much  broader 
than  the  classroom  (see  Chap.  VI). 


THE   COMMUNITY   THEORY  103 

Consistent  with  this  conception  the  min  "nD?n  (Talmud  Torah) ,  as 
the  Communal  Jewish  School  is  called,1  becomes  the  central  agency  of 
the  community,  the  institution  around  which  it  builds  the  social  life 
and  by  means  of  which  it  transmits  the  significant  culture  of  the  ethnic 
group.  Working  hand  in  hand  with  the  public  schools  the  Talmud 
Torah  provides  that  education  which  the  ethnic  community  alone  is 
capable  of  transmitting.  It  selects  from  the  inheritance  of  the  group 
those  things  which  are  of  abiding  worth.  The  loyalty  which  the 
school  demands  is  not  to  the  past  for  the  sake  of  the  past  nor  to  charac- 
teristic customs  and  ceremonies  when  these  are  trivial,  but  to  what  is 
sublime,  significant  and  beautiful  in  the  history  of  the  ethnos.  The 
philological  meaning  of  Torah,  which  is  "Instruction,"  enforces  the 
idea  and  gives  the  key  to  the  method  as  well  as  the  aim  of  the  pres- 
ervation of  Jewish  life.  Torah,  Jewishness,  is  not  attained  through 
revelation  or  maintained  through  racial  persistence;  it  is  essentially 
study  and  must  be  acquired  by  means  of  the  educational  process. 

The  function  of  the  complementary  schools,  as  is  also  the  function  of 
the  communal  organization  of  which  the  schools  are  the  agency,  is  to 
transmit  the  culture  of  the  ethnic  group  and  thus  to  enrich  the  life  of 
the  individual  Jew  and  through  him  that  of  the  total  group.  If  these 
schools  have  something  to  contribute  to  the  citizen  that  will  induce 
him  to  remain  in  loyal  adherence  to  his  ethnic  community,  his  alle- 
giance and  the  perpetuation  of  the  community  are  justified.  The 
ethnic  group  cannot  demand  the  loyalty  of  those  to  whom  the  cultural 
life  of  the  ethnos  offers  no  inspiration,  whether  these  have  not  the 
emotional  and  aesthetic  faculties  of  appreciation  or  whether  they 
regard  the  ethnic  tradition  as  being  too  separatist.  Those  foreign 
groups  which  have  no  cultural  heritage  cannot  remain  segregated  on 
account  of  some  assumed  racial  identity.  Our  theory  requires  neither 
proof  nor  assumption  that  a  group  has  an  identity  of  race  which  is 
significant  or  a  culture  which  is  particularly  excellent.  It  endeavors 
to  provide  conditions  which  will  permit  these  factors  to  play — to 
determine  whether  they  really  do  exist  and  are  important — without  at 
the  same  time  minimizing  the  duties  and  possibilities  which  rise  out  of 

1See  A.  M.  Dushkin,  Jewish  Education  in  New  York  City,  p.  68.     The  words  TCcbn 
mean  "Study  of  the  Torah." 


104  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

living  in  America.  By  making  the  educational  agency  central  and 
the  fundamental  means  of  perpetuating  the  group,  we  have  chosen  the 
instrument  which  is  directly  relevant  to  what  we  wish  to  preserve, 
namely,  the  cultural  life  of  the  ethnic  group. 

The  attempt  to  promote  Jewish  identity  by  local  segregation  and 
autonomous  government,  as  is  implied  in  the  'Federation  of  Nationali- 
ties' theory,  would  introduce  a  force  making  for  separation  which 
would  gather  its  strength  from  other  sources  than  the  value  and  the 
appeal  of  the  ethnic  culture.  Such  organization  would  load  the  dice, 
so  to  speak,  and  bring  to  the  support  of  the  ethnic  solidarity  an  aid  in 
reality  extrinsic  to  the  nature  of  that  which  is  considered  valuable. 
It  is  necessary  to  be  careful  in  pressing  this  point  to  avoid  a  dualistic 
position,  for,  undoubtedly,  education  cannot  be  given  apart  from  some 
type  of  institution  which  involves  the  living  together  of  men,  com- 
munity organization  and  some  governmental  guarantee  that  this 
free  association  will  not  be  disturbed.  But  it  must  be  clearly  borne 
in  mind  that  whatever  segregated  communal  power  exists  must  be 
directly  derived  from  the  necessity  of  the  educational  process  itself, 
sanctioned  in  so  far  as  it  can  preserve  what  seems  worth  while  in 
Jewish  life,  not  from  the  mere  fact  of  living  together,  nor  from  the 
assumption  of  a  common  heredity.  The  sanction  for  Jewish  organiza- 
tion must  rest  on  its  culture. 

On  the  other  hand,  culture  must  have  support  in  social  life  and 
adequate  expression  in  communal  institutions.  The  religious  idea 
with  the  synagogue,  conceived  as  a  place  of  worship  primarily,  as  the 
central  communal  agency  offers  too  narrow  a  concept  to  include  the 
full  range  of  Jewish  spiritual  life.  In  the  recent  tendency  to  define 
religion  in  broad  terms,  making  it  practically  synonymous  with  the 
spiritual  and  social  aspiration,  we  have  an  attempt  to  regain  for 
religion  that  wide  province  of  control  which  it  has  lost  through  the 
transition  from  a  theological  to  a  scientific  and  political  stage  of  social 
organization.  Nevertheless,  there  is  an  element  of  plausibility  in  this 
reinterpretation,  for  religion  when  it  becomes  elevated  and  ideal 
attaches  itself  to  the  profound,  the  eternal,  the  universal.  The  error 
comes  when  this  idealistic  definition  of  the  ultimate  aspiration  of 
religion  is  identified  with  the  historical  religions  which  have  found 


THE   COMMUNITY   THEORY  105 

expression  in  the  temples,  churches  and  synagogues,  and  these  are 
presented  as  the  central  agencies  for  the  development  of  social  and 
spiritual  life.     But,  obviously,  the  synagogue  (or  church)  is  only  one 
agency  with  a  limited  sphere  of  influence.     The  synagogue  even  in 
religious  ages  included  secular  elements ;  it  was  the  House  of  Study 
and  the  House  of  Meeting  as  well  as  the  House  of  Prayer.     In  modern 
times,  with  the  shift  of  emphasis  to  secularism,  the  Jewish  conception, 
always  tinged  with  anti-clericalism,  must  tend  to  emphasize  the  realis- 
tic interests  of  social  life  rather  than  the  sentimental  outlook  which 
centers  about  prayer.     The  culture  of  the  Jewish  people,  including  as 
it  does  a  language,  a  literature,  and  a  profoundly  spiritual  social  out- 
look, cannot  be  confined  within  the  walls  of  the  synagogue,  where  the 
erstwhile  living  thought  is  embalmed  in  liturgy,  aspiration  petrified 
into  prayer,  and  social  life  fossilized  in  ceremonies.     Not  the  particular 
form,  but  the  vital  longing  for  spiritual  life  is  primary  in  Jewish  life, 
and  this  finds  embodiment  in  every  age  in  that  phase  which  for  the 
time  is  most  significant  for  social  life.     Jewish  life,  deeply  spiritual, 
can  be  conceived  of  as  cultural  and  political  as  well  as  religious  and 
ecclesiastic.     Only  the  combined  force  of  formalized  traditionalism, 
unwittingly  abetting  the  anti-Jewish  environment  driving  to  dena- 
tionalization, can  reduce  the  richness  of  the  Jewish  cultural  heritage 
to  the  attenuated  doctrines,  superstitious  sentimentalisms  and  cere- 
monious practices  which  remain  the  content  of  'religion'  for  the  many. 
Philanthropy  can  even  less  be  considered  as  an  adequate  binding 
force  between  Jews,  even  though  it  will  long  continue  to  be  an  out- 
standing element  in  Jewish  communal  life.     Charity  is  a  public  not  a 
private  function.     When  a  man  is  ill  or  stricken  with  poverty  it 
matters  little  whether  he  is  a  Jew  or  a  Bohemian;  the  efficiency  of  the 
whole  community  is  lowered  and  the  public  health  endangered.     So, 
too,  the  problem  of  recreation  facilities,  social  centers,  etc.,  is  a  public 
not  a  private  function.     There  is  no  essential  reason  why  the  cir- 
cumcized  and  the  uncircumcized  should  not  exercise  together;    the 
same  rules  of  hygiene  apply  to  all.     The  coming  together  of  Jews 
merely  because  of  their  consciousness  of  kin  is  the  most  reprehensible 
form  of  clannishness.     For  it  is  not  justified  by  spiritual  products 
which  should  result  from  coming  together.     It  is  a  strange  paradox 


106  THEORIES   OF  AMEBICAN1ZATION 

that  those  Jews  who  proclaim,  "Americanization"  most  loudly  and 
who  are  generally  deemed  assimilationists  should  be  the  very  ones 
to  promote  the  sectarian  recreational  settlement  while  often  decrying 
the  promotion  of  Jewish  teaching  and  Jewish  culture!  Until  the 
State  realizes  to  the  full  extent  the  importance  of  providing  for  the 
abnormal  and  learns  to  understand  the  relation  of  ills  and  their  cure  to 
the  social  psychology  of  various  peoples  there  is  undoubtedly  room, 
even  absolute  necessity,  for  private  philanthropy  along  sectarian  and 
ethnic  lines.  The  Jewish  leaders  in  New  York  City  who  have  built  up 
an  excellent  system  of  eleemosynary  institutions  have,  to  be  sure, 
rendered  invaluable  service  both  to  the  Jews  and  to  the  community 
at  large.  Undoubtedly  in  the  beginnings  of  communal  endeavor  the 
abnormal  aspects  had  to  receive  first  attention.  But  in  the  ultimate 
sense  these  are  not  permanent  or  essential  Jewish  tasks.  Certainly, 
they  are  not  the  only  Jewish  tasks. 

In  so  far  as  the  ethnic  group  is  organized  for  political  purposes  and 
through  political  means,  its  activity  is  a  menace.  In  so  far  as  it  is 
organized  as  a  philanthropic  agency,  it  is  performing  a  valuable 
function  although  one  not  essentially  its  own,  but  rather  that  of  the 
state.  But  in  so  far  as  it  exists  to  perpetuate  the  spiritual  and  cul- 
tural heritage  of  a  community  it  is  performing  a  task  relevant  to  what 
sanctions  the  existence  of  such  a  community,  the  possibility  of  enrich- 
ing the  life  of  the  nation  by  its  own  cultural  inheritance. 

The  'Community'  theory,  then,  would  seem  to  make  full  provision 
for  the  requirements  of  American  life,  while  aiming  to  contribute  to 
America  the  finer  elements  in  the  ethnic  tradition.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  question  may  be  raised  whether  such  a  method  of  adjust- 
ment will  be  adequate  for  preserving  the  foreign  ethnic  group  from 
extinction.  Constantly  subject  to  the  play  of  forces  from  without,  is 
there  any  hope  that  the  ethnic  group  will  be  able  to  maintain  its 
identity  and  to  develop  its  culture  in  new  and  creative  ways?  In 
accordance  with  the  'Community'  theory  it  is  the  clear  consciousness 
of  the  worth  of  the  ethnic  heritage,  implying  the  power  of  compre- 
hension and  appreciation  in  great  degrees,  upon  which  the  perpetua- 
tion of  the  ethnos  must  rest  in  a  democratic  land.  Are  the  many, 
usually  unreasoning,  fashioning  their  lives  through  force  of  instinct, 


THE  COMMUNITY  THEORY  107 

personal  habit  and  social  pressure,  capable  of  being  held  and  directed 
by  a  spiritual  heritage,  which  must  be  transmitted  in  great  part 
through  books  and  language;  especially  when  this  heritage  is  not 
supported  by  economic,  political  and  social  interests? 

The  danger  of  disintegration  is  undoubtedly  real,  especially  if  there 
is  more  than  a  formal  religious  adherence  in  mind.  To  some  thinkers1 
the  fate  of  the  Jews  in  democratic  countries,  wherever  they  form  a 
minority  of  the  population  (and  they  do  so  practically  everywhere)  is 
inevitable  extinction.  The  analysis  presented  here,  suggesting  a  way, 
consistent  with  democratic  notions,  of  maintaining  the  identity  of  a 
cultural  nationality  even  when  it  is  a  minority,  is  presented  not  as  the 
necessary  outcome  of  a  laissez-faire  policy,  but  as  a  possibility  of 
accomplishment  through  conscious  and  intelligent  endeavor.  Only 
when  the  minority  cultural  community  is  self-conscious  of  its  purpose 
and  deliberate  in  its  method  can  there  be  hope  that  the  school  will  be 
effective  in  counteracting  the  forces  of  disintegration. 

In  estimating  the  possibility  of  maintaining  the  ethnic  identity,  two 
factors  of  extreme  importance  must  be  borne  in  mind,  the  rate  of 
intermarriage  and  the  influence  of  a  'home'  country  where  the  culture 
of  the  ethnic  group  is  predominant.  The  integrity  of  the  family  will 
determine  the  physical  stability  of  the  group;  the  'home'  country  will 
serve  as  a  reservoir  from  which  to  draw  forces  of  renewal.  The 
validity  of  the  'Community'  theory  will  depend  in  great  measure 
upon  its  implications  in  regard  to  both  these  factors. 

THE  FAMILY 

From  the  point  of  view  of  the  raison  d'etre  of  the  preservation  of  the 
ethnic  community,  the  school  becomes  the  central  institution  because 
it  reproduces  that  which  is  essential  to  the  group  as  a  community — its 
cultural  life.  From  the  point  of  view  of  physical  perpetuation, 
which  is  the  condition  of  any  other  kind  of  life,  the  family  is  basic. 
Intermarriage,  with  rare  exception,  leads  to  a  total  obliteration  of  the 
culture  of  the  ethnic  minority.  Unless  the  family  preserves  the  ethnic 
affiliation,  the  child  will  never  have  the  opportunity  of  coming  under 

1Arthur  Ruppin,  The  Jews  of  Today.  J.  Wdhausen,  The  History  of  Israel  and 
Judah. 


108  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

the  influences  of  school  and  synagogue.  The  integrity  of  the  Jewish 
family,  therefore,  becomes  sine  qua  non  to  any  preservation  of  Jewish 
life,  and  intermarriage  tending  to  disrupt  the  group  becomes  logically 
impossible  for  those  who  wish  to  preserve  the  cultural  values  of  the 
ethnic  minority  as  vital  living  forces.  The  'Community'  theory, 
therefore,  presupposes  marriage  within  the  group  only  as  the  general 
practice.  What  local  autonomy  and  territorial  boundaries  would 
accomplish  in  the  'Federation  of  Nationalities'  theory  would  be 
assured  in  our  own  view  through  family  solidarity.  To  bring  about 
the  ethnic  'purity'  indirect  and  intrinsic  influences  are  conceived  as 
functioning.  The  sanction  for  intermarriage  would  rest  in  the 
recognition  that  the  ethnic  group  is  of  spiritual  significance,  not 
primarily  on  religious  basis  or  communal  pressure.  Marriage  within 
the  group  would  be  the  result  of  free  choice  to  preserve  the  cultural 
inheritance,  not  the  impulse  of  racial  clannishness  or  the  dictates  of  a 
superstitious  tribalism.  Our  theory,  moreover,  does  not  propose 
absolute  non-intermarriage  either  as  possible  or  as  desirable.  Wher- 
ever the  ethnic  affiliation  has  lost  its  significance,  either  because  the 
individual  is  too  gross  to  appreciate  it  or  because  a  universal  cause, 
such  as  science,  music  or  art  has  become  a  religious  enthusiasm  and 
displaced  other  loyalties,  intermarriage  may  take  place  without  social 
detriment.  In  the  one  case,  no  cultural  value  exists  anyway;  in  the 
other  case,  we  may  console  ourselves  that  new  spiritual  values  have 
been  substituted.  It  is  when  the  ethnic  loyalty  is  obliterated  without 
providing  something  equally  akin  to  the  nature  of  the  person  and 
equally  elevating  that  a  loss  has  been  sustained.  Once  assuming 
the  value  of  the  ethnic  group,  a  nucleus  of  family  solidarity  becomes 
necessary.  Intermarriage  dare  not  proceed  to  the  point  where  it 
threatens  the  life  of  the  community.  This  the  community  must 
prevent,  not  by  religious  ban  or  social  ostracism,  but  by  providing  the 
educational  influences  which  would  lead  the  individual  to  cherish  the 
cultural  and  spiritual  values  of  the  group. 

Such  exclusiveness  may  seem  at  first  inconsistent  with  the  free 
interchange  of  forces  that  the  democratic  idea  demands.  But  the 
right  to  preserve  the  identity  implies  also  the  right  to  preserve  those 
institutions  which  are  basic.  The  process  of  mutual  interchange 


THE   COMMUNITY   THEORY  109 

cannot  proceed  to  the  point  where  one  of  the  bodies  involved  is 
destroyed,  for  that  would  prevent  a  further  exchange  of  forces.  The 
Jewish  family  must  undoubtedly  be  open  to  influences  of  American 
life  and  be  modified  by  them,  but  it  would  not  be  necessary  for,  or 
really  consistent  with,  our  theory  to  destroy  it.  Upholding  in  theory 
the  right  of  free  immigration  and  favoring  the  resulting  interchange  of 
forces,  one  may  still  counsel  restriction  when  the  volume  of  immigra- 
tion threatens  to  swamp  America  and  its  quality  to  undermine  our 
institutions.  There  must  be  a  balance  in  the  elements  of  give  and 
take  to  preserve  the  entities.  In  the  'Community'  theory  the  family 
is  the  keystone  of  the  social  situation;  if  it  should  be  destroyed  the 
whole  would  crumble. 

ZIONISM1 

It  is  to  be  understood  that  the  'Community'  theory  is  not  offered  as 
a  total  solution  of  the  Jewish  problem,  the  problem  of  freedom  for 
the  Jewish  People  to  live  and  to  create  in  harmony  with  the  spirit  of 
its  history  and  its  genius.  The  theory  presented  purposes  only  to  pre- 
serve Jewish  life  for  the  Jew  living  in  America  and  through  him  for 
America.  In  the  task  of  solving  the  larger  Jewish  problem  the  writer 
is  in  thorough  accord  with  the  Zionists  who  maintain  that  an  autono- 
mous Jewish  community  with  a  territorial  basis  in  Palestine  is  necessary 
for  the  free  development  of  the  Jewish  cultural  and  spiritual  life. 
Indeed  the  Zionist  idea  becomes  even  more  urgent  in  view  of  the  type 
of  adjustment,  admittedly  precarious  for  the  ethnic  group,  demanded 
by  the  democratic  conditions.  Even  the  possibility  of  maintaining  a 
vital  ethnic  culture  in  the  diaspora  is  dependent  upon  the  existence  of 
a  cultural  center  to  serve  as  a  source  of  spiritual  replenishment  and  to 
prevent  the  ethnic  spirit  from  becoming  the  petrified  relic  of  an  ancient 
grandeur.  The  'Community'  theory  becomes  a  hopeful  solution  only 
if  there  will  be  established  an  autonomous  Jewish  center  in  Palestine. 


^Theodore  Herzl,  The  Jevrish  State,  AUneuland,  Zionistische  Schriften;  Leo  Pinsker, 
Auto-Emancipation;  Moses  Hess,  Rome  and  Jerusalem. 

Ahad  Ha' Am  (Asher  Ginsberg)  Al  Parashat  Derachim,  4  vols. ;  Selected  Essays, 
Translated  from  the  Hebrew  by  Leon  Simon ;  Horace  M.  Kallen,  Constitutional  Founda- 
tions of  the  New  Zion;  Richard  Gottheil,  Zionism;  Jessie  E.  Sampler,  A  Guide  to 
Zionism. 


110  THEORIES   OT  AMERICANIZATION 

Our  theory,  then,  becomes  part  of  an  international  conception.  The 
Jewish  community  in  America  is  regarded  as  one  of  many  sister 
communities  throughout  the  world,  each  adjusted  to  the  social  and 
political  conditions  of  the  land  of  habitation,  bound  together  by  its 
cultural-religious  inheritance  and  by  the  spiritual  inspiration  of  the 
Palestinian  center.  It  is  completely  in  accord  and  really  an  elabora- 
tion of  the  Culture-Zionist  theory  formulated  by  Ahad  Ha-Am. 
Involving  as  it  does  an  affiliation  with  a  foreign  land  it  will  be  neces- 
sary to  make  clear  what  is  involved  in  such  a  loyalty. 

In  the  first  place,  even  an  elementary  understanding  of  the  charac- 
ter of  the  Zionist  movement  should  prevent  us  from  setting  up  a 
bugaboo  to  frighten  us  into  believing  that  here  lurks  the  monster  of  a 
dual  political  allegiance.  The  aspiration  for  the  return  to  Palestine  is 
essentially  spiritual,  resting  upon  the  prayerful  longing  for  the  She- 
chinah's  return  to  Zion  which  animates  the  Jewish  liturgy.  There 
enters  into  the  Zionist  hope,  no  doubt,  a  complex  of  unfulfilled  desires, 
the  counterpart  of  two  thousand  years  of  political,  economic,  and 
social  repression;  and  the  modern  leaders  who  created  the  machinery 
of  Zionism  often  looked  upon  their  movement  as  a  means  of  obtaining 
equal  rights  for  Jews.  Nevertheless,  the  thought  of  cultural  freedom 
is  central.  The  political  idea  enters  only  in  so  far  as  it  is  seen  to  be 
prerequisite  to  cultural  self-determination.  Especially  in  the 
formulation  of  Ahad  Ha-Am  which  has  now  become  widely  accepted 
among  Zionists  the  cultural  idea  becomes  predominant.  In  harmony 
with  a  rationalistic  trend  of  thought  Ahad  Ha-Am  gives  Zionism  a 
broadly  cultural  rather  than  religious  atmosphere.  He  does  not 
minimize  the  importance  of  political  and  practical  plans.  In  fact 
he  goes  even  further  than  former  writers  in  demanding  practical 
insight  and  thorough  logic.  He  has  pointed  out,  nevertheless,  that 
Palestine  can  be  no  ultimate  solution  for  the  problems  of  economic 
and  political  exploitation  of  the  Jew  and  of  social  anti-Semitism,  if  for 
no  other  reasons  than  because  Palestine  is  not  large  enough  for  the 
settlement  of  a  large  majority  of  the  Jews.  It  might,  indeed,  serve 
incidentally  as  a  refuge  in  times  of  particular  stress  in  some  countries 
and  might  become  a  source  of  influence  for  the  general  amelioration  of 
conditions.  But  these  benefits  must  be  considered  incidental.  The 


THE  COMMUNITY   THEORY  111 

problem  of  the  equality  of  political  and  civil  rights  must  find  its  solu- 
tion, even  if  slowly,  with  the  humanization  of  Western  civilization. 
Palestine  is  not  the  solution  of  the  problems  of  the  Jews  as  individ- 
uals. But  it  can  become  a  haven  for  the  Jewish  soul,  a  place  where 
Judaism  as  a  national  culture  may  be  perpetuated  and  attain  a  full 
and  unhampered  development.  What  is  being  threatened  is  Jewish 
civilization  which  needs  its  own  social  background  and  atmosphere  for 
free  growth;  above  all  it  is  a  spiritual  slavery  from  which  the  Jew 
must  be  emancipated.  This  thought  has  undoubtedly  become  the 
central  idea  in  the  modern  Zionist  philosophy. 

In  thinking,  then,  of  a  Jewish  nation  in  Palestine,  and  of  the  relation 
to  it  of  the  American  Jewish  Community,  it  must  be  borne  in  mind 
that  to  the  Zionist  the  words  'nation'  and  'national'  have  a  pre- 
dominantly cultural  (i.e.,  psychological)  connotation,  more  familiar 
perhaps  to  English  readers  when  the  term  'nationality'  is  used.1 
They  want  a  place  where  those  Jews  who  so  desire  may  follow  their 
own  customs,  speak  their  own  language,  attend  their  own  schools  and 
live  in  accordance  with  their  traditions  and  ideals.  In  this  concep- 
tion of  nationality  they  follow  that  school  of  nationalists,  disciples  of 
Mazzini,  to  whom  group  individuality  is  justified  not  by  its  power  to 
dominate  but  by  its  ability  to  serve.  Nationality  is  conceived  of  in 
terms  not  incompatible  with,  but  helpful  for  the  good  of  mankind. 

The  allegiance  that  the  Jew  in  America  may  offer  to  Palestine  in 
accordance  with  the  'Community'  theory  is  a  spiritual  allegiance  to  a 
cultural  center.  In  his  economic  life  he  must  by  force  of  circum- 
stances be  subject  to  the  conditions  of  the  country  in  which  he  lives. 
In  his  political  life,  he  must  by  virtue  of  the  duty  that  his  oath  of 
citizenship  implies,  give  a  complete  allegiance  to  America.  In  the 
event  of  any  political  differences  between  the  two  countries,  although 
the  Jews  might  do  their  best  to  avoid  an  open  break,  ultimately  each 
citizen  must  side  with  the  land  of  his  habitation.  His  spiritual 
attachment,  if  we  speak  honestly,  cannot  be  forced  either  to  Palestine 

^ee  War  and  Democracy,  Chap.  II.  When  an  American  says  'nation,'  he  thinks  of 
government.  When  a  cultural-Zionist  (or  many  of  the  representatives  of  small 
nationalities)  uses  the  word  he  thinks  of  language  and  literature.  It  is  important  to 
note  that  most  of  the  confusion  in  reference  to  Zionism  comes  from  an  equivocal  mean- 
ing of  the  word  'nation.' 


112  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

or  to  America.  It  will  go  to  both  if  the  life  of  both  are  inspiring, 
provided  that  both  are  open  to  him.  Living  in  America  and  attend- 
ing the  public  schools  insures  contact  with  American  life;  the  family 
and  the  Jewish  school  provide  an  opportunity  for  learning  the  signifi- 
cance of  his  people's  history. 

It  must  be  borne  carefully  in  mind,  then,  in  urging  the  value  of  the 
retention  of  an  ethnic  loyalty  that  a  clear  distinction  must  be  made 
between  the  political  and  cultural  aspects  of  the  term  'nation.'  Indeed, 
it  is  possible  even  to  feel  friendly  towards  or  even  lend  aid  to  foreign 
governments  as  we  do  to  allied  governments.  In  case  of  a  conflict, 
allegiance  is  due  solely  to  the  land  of  one's  citizenship.  Cultural 
loyalties,  however,  since  they  partake  of  the  nature  of  spiritual  goods, 
need  not  conflict  with  each  other.  Thus  even  during  the  war  all  but 
the  chauvinists  realized  that  a  distinction  was  to  be  drawn  between 
the  literary,  artistic  and  spiritual  products  of  the  German  people  and 
the  government  of  the  German  militaristic  clique.  In  all  thinking 
on  the  question  of  national  privileges  and  rights  of  self-determination 
this  important  difference  between  a  cultural  and  political  allegiance 
must  be  borne  in  mind.  It  is  explicitly  understood  that  a  cultural 
not  a  political  allegiance  to  Palestine  is  involved  in  our  conception, 
and  that  this  cultural  loyalty  is  compatible  with  an  allegiance  to  the 
culture  of  America.  The  political  allegiance  is  single  and  to  the  land 
of  citizenship. 

Such  an  organization  of  a  people  as  is  here  contemplated,  inter- 
national in  its  scope,  must  itself  become  a  force  anxious  to  maintain 
the  integrity  of  international  relationships.  It  is  one  of  those  factors 
the  multiplication  of  which  makes  surer  the  possibility  of  a  League  of 
Nations  bound  not  only  by  verbal  and  legal  agreements  but  also  by  a 
common  good  will  and  community  of  interests.  It  is  one  of  those 
bonds  which  must  make  keener  the  realization  that  all  modern  wars 
are  civil  wars.  While  not  in  the  end  interfering  with  a  wholehearted, 
complete  allegiance  to  particular  states,  there  is  here  a  force  working 
in  the  direction  of  mitigating  and  ultimately  displacing  that  danger 
which  is  ever  present  in  the  current  emphasis  on  economic  national- 
ism.1 

'See  Chap.  IV. 


THE  COMMUNITY  THEORY  113 

VARIABILITY  IN  RETENTION  OF  ETHNIC  ALLEGIANCE 

It  becomes  apparent  if  we  bear  closely  in  mind  the  cultural  nature 
of  the  allegiance  proposed  by  the  'Community'  theory  of  adjustment, 
that  individuals  will  vary  greatly  in  the  degree  and  kind  of  their 
loyalty.  Even  when  we  are  thinking  primarily  of  political  loyalties 
there  is  a  great  range  of  variation  in  the  manner  and  readiness  with 
which  the  citizen  is  prepared  to  perform  his  duties.  But,  granted  that 
he  performs  them,  we  must  in  a  practical  sense  count  him  among 
those  who  serve  the  country.  When  a  cultural  loyalty  is  involved  the 
range  of  variation  is  surely  wider,  for  there  is  no  legally  established 
minimum  for  spiritual  allegiance.  In  addition  to  this  the  multiplic- 
ity of  cultural  forces  assumed  to  play  upon  the  individuals  in  any 
ethnic  group  will  surely  tend  to  increase  the  individual  variability 
in  retention  of  the  ethnic  attachment.  It  must  be  remembered,  then, 
that  in  urging  the  perpetuation  of  the  ethnic  group  through  cultural 
forces  we  can  never  expect  every  individual  within  the  group  to  retain 
allegiance  or  that  all  should  retain  it  in  equal  degree.  The  range 
would  vary  through  small  and  graded  differences  from  the  individual 
whose  knowledge,  ethnic  consciousness  and  loyalty  equalled  that  of  an 
educated  person  in  the  homeland  to  the  individual  who  had  inter- 
married and  severed  all  relations  with  the  group  in  which  he  was  born. 

The  following  estimate  of  the  maximum  expectation  for  retention 
of  the  ethnic  loyalty  among  the  Jews  may  help  to  make  more  concrete 
the  idea  of  variability  in  type  of  allegiance  contemplated  in  the 
'Community'  theory  of  adjustment.  For  the  purposes  of  our  dis- 
cussion the  Jews  may  be  conceived  as  being  divided  into  six  classes,  as 
follows  : 

Class  A.  Cultural  Allegiance.  In  this  group  would  be  included 
those  upon  whose  personality  the  culture  ideals  and  aspirations  of 
the  ethnic  group  have  a  shaping  influence.  Within  the  group  there 
would  naturally  be  variability,  for  the  variations  are  conceived  as 
individual.  The  maximum  attainment  would  be  such  a  knowl- 
edge of  the  language,  literature  and  social  life  of  the  ethnic  group  as 
would  be  expected  from  an  educated  person  in  the  homeland  of  the 
ethnos.  The  minimum  would  be  a  sufficient  knowledge  of  the 


114  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

language  and  life  of  the  ethnic  group  to  make  possible  an  appreciation 
of  the  literary  culture  of  the  group.  Together  with  this  knowledge 
and  appreciation  would  generally  go  a  desire  to  maintain  and  to  per- 
petuate the  type  of  cultural  life  represented  by  the  ethnic  group. 
Needless  to  repeat,  such  a  complete  ethnic  loyalty  is  regarded  as 
altogether  compatible  with  an  equally  complete  allegiance  to  America. 
Intellectual  capability  and  education,  not  an  exclusive  spirit,  will 
develop  class  A. 

Class  B.  Synagogue  and  Ceremonial  Allegiance.  In  this  group 
would  fall  those  whose  main  center  of  gravity  lies  not  in  the  cultural 
life  itself  but  who  maintain  contact  with  the  spiritual  productions  of 
the  Jewish  people  through  its  religious  institutions.  The  religious 
institutions,  it  might  be  said,  represent  a  selected,  crystallized  and 
attenuated  form  of  the  products  of  the  Jewish  social  life  and  of  the 
Jewish  mind.  Undoubtedly  when  the  shell  of  religiosity  is  broken 
and  the  inner  meaning  realized  these  institutions  represent  the  most 
significant  products  of  the  Jewish  past.  The  prayer  book,  much  of 
the  Biblical  literature  and  some  of  the  Talmudic  writings  may  be 
acquired  in  this  manner.  For  this  class  Jewish  life  and  thought  still 
function  to  some  degree  in  a  significant  national  cultural  way. 
This  type  of  adherence  is  usually  maintained  through  orthodox  or 
conservative  synagogues  where  the  service  is  mainly  in  Hebrew  and 
approximates  the  traditional. 

Classes  C  and  D.  Formal  Non-Functioning  "Religious'  Adherence. 
In  these  classes  would  fall  those  who  regard  their  Jewish  allegiance  as 
'religious'  in  the  conventional  sense  of  the  term.  The  Jewish  prac- 
tices are  regarded  as  a  variant  form  of  religion,  coordinate  with 
Protestantism  and  Catholicism.  In  these  groups  would  fall  the  great 
majority  who  follow  out  of  force  of  convention  and  social  momentum. 
An  element  of  ancestor  worship  and  superstition  prevents  them  from 
abandoning  "the  faith."  Jewishness  really  contributes  nothing  to 
their  lives  which  another  religious  practice  or  ceremonial  could  not  do 
quite  as  well.  These  individuals  have  not  the  energy  or  interest  to 
make  something  out  of  their  allegiance  and  yet  lack  the  initiative  to 
break  away  and  to  adopt  a  new  "ism."  The  formal  religious  adher- 
ence, however,  would  still  tend  to  prevent  intermarriage. 


THE  COMMUNITY   THEORY  115 

In  Class  C  can  be  included  those  who  still  maintain  part  of  the 
Jewish  ritual  and  ceremonial  and  who  attend  either  an  orthodox  or 
a  conservative  synagogue  on  the  Holy  Days.  In  Class  D  can  be  in- 
cluded those  who  have  given  up  Jewish  ceremonial  practices  and  who 
attend  a  'Reform' synagogue  (i.e.,  one  in  which  the  service  is  mainly  in 
English  and  which  in  many  respects  resembles  the  service  in  certain  of 
the  Protestant  churches  rather  than  that  of  the  traditional  Jewish 
synagogue). 

Class  E.  Social  and  Philanthropic  Connection.  In  this  group 
would  be  included  those  to  whom  the  cultural  allegiance  is  meaningless 
and  even  the  formal  religious  adherence  secondary,  but  who  maintain 
distinctly  Jewish  associations  through  the  social  set  with  which  they 
usually  mingle  or  through  their  interest  in  Jewish  philanthropy  and 
Jewish  affairs.  All  the  groups  preceding  this  one  would  tend  to 
marry  only  within  the  Jewish  group.  The  individuals  in  this  group 
may  be  considered  as  not  unwilling  to  intermarry. 

Class  F.  Severance  of  the  Ethnic  Relation  and  Intermarriage.  In 
this  group  would  be  included  those  who  have  practically  severed  all 
connection  with  Jewish  life  and  whose  origin  is  the  only  distinguishing 
mark.  Accident  rather  than  desire  would  decide  whether  these 
would  intermarry. 

The  classification  is  offered  as  neither  an  exact  nor  a  complete 
description  of  Jewish  types  but  merely  as  a  means  of  holding  in  mind 
the  broadest  differentiations.  The  groups  are  not  sharply  divided 
nor  mutually  exclusive.  It  will  not  be  necessary,  futhermore,  for  an 
individual  to  go  through  all  the  stages  before  reaching  intermarriage, 
though  that  may  be  the  tendency.  Classification  in  relation  to  cul- 
tural allegiance  does  not  imply  a  similar  degree  of  religious  piety  nor, 
on  the  other  hand,  the  opposite.  Many  individuals  in  Class  A  will  be 
indifferent  or  avowedly  opposed  to  established  religion  while  many 
ignorant  of  Jewish  culture  in  any  real  sense  of  the  word  may  be 
deemed  "orthodox."  Among  the  intermarried,  furthermore,  one 
occasionally  finds  both  learned  and  loyal  Jews.  With  these  precau- 
tions in  mind  we  may  say  that  under  normal  conditions,  provided 
immigration  is  not  unduly  accelerated  by  untoward  political  and 
social  conditions  in  other  lands  and  provided  an  adequate  school 


116 


THEORIS   OF   AMERICANIZATION 


system  implied  in  the  'Community'  theory  of  adjustment  has  been 
functioning,  the  maximum  expectation  would  be  a  distribution  some- 
thing as  follows,  graphically: 


and  in  percentages: 

A.  Cultural  Allegiance 10%  per  cent. 

B.  Synagogue  and  Ceremonial  Allegiance 15% 

C.  and  D.     Formal  Non-Functioning  'Religious'  Adherence   . .  50% 

E.  Social  and  Philanthropic  Connection 15% 

F.  Severance  of  Ethnic  Relation  and  Intermarriage  .  .  10% 


Summarizing,  twenty-five  per  cent  would  in  some  manner  be 
influenced  in  a  positive  way  by  the  ethnic  culture,  twenty-five  per 
cent  would  be  on  the  road  to  complete  fusion  and  fifty  per  cent  would 
in  reality  not  be  affected  in  a  significant  way  by  the  ethnic  culture 
though  retaining  the  ethnic  allegiance  as  a  formality. 

The  estimate  of  ten  per  cent  for  the  group  in  Class  A  is  at  present 
only  an  ideal.  The  percentage  of  American  born  children  whom  it 
would  be  possible  to  classify  under  A  would  be  far  below  one  per  cent. 
The  estimate  for  the  group  in  Class  F  of  those  who  have  severed  con- 
nection and  are  prepared  for  intermarriage,  is  very  close  to  if  not 
above  the  percentage  given.  It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  the  forces 
of  the  environment  are  considered  by  the  writer  as  on  the  whole 
disintegrating  to  a  significant  Jewish  loyalty  on  the  part  of  the 
majority.  The  highest  to  be  hoped  for  from  such  a  scheme  as  is 
presented  in  the  'Community'  theory  of  adjustment  is  to  retain  a 


THE   COMMUNITY   THEORY  117 

small  proportion  of  those  born  within  the  group  attached  in  a  signifi- 
cant cultural  way  to  the  group.  Even  such  success  as  is  implied 
here  is  doubtful  and  if  attained  at  all  will  be  only  through  the  expendi- 
ture of  directed  thought  and  conscious  action. 

To  those  who  are  deeply  concerned  for  the  perpetuation  of  the 
national  culture  and  identity  such  an  analysis  may  seem  disappoint- 
ing to  the  hope  for  retention  of  the  subsidiary  ethnic  groups.  Never- 
theless, the  type  of  adjustment  sketched  in  the  'Community'  theory 
seems  to  be  the  only  one  compatible  with  the  notions  of  democracy. 
To  restrict  the  free  flow  of  currents  of  life  from  the  general  environ- 
ment in  such  a  way  that  some  particular  tradition  may  be  artificially 
protected,  would  not  harmonize  with  the  basic  idea  of  freedom  for  the 
development  of  individuality  which  is  the  main  plea.  In  view  of  the 
fact  that  the  type  of  adjustment  demanded  in  the  democratic  countries 
in  which  the  Jews  live  provides  for  only  a  limited  and  doubtful 
perpetuation  the  necessity  for  a  cultural  center  in  Palestine  becomes 
all  the  more  urgent.  The  Zionist  idea  is  an  important  factor  in  this 
whole  scheme  of  adjustment.  By  insuring  the  Jewish  future  in 
Palestine  it  permits  the  Jews  in  the  diaspora  to  adjust  themselves  in 
harmony  with  the  principles  and  conditions  of  each  land  without 
becoming  guilty  of  the  destruction  of  their  people.  This  inter- 
national conception  of  the  organization  of  Jewish  life  leaves  the  indi- 
vidual most  free  in  choosing  whether  he  should  continue  in  the  life  to 
which  he  was  born  and  also  in  what  manner  and  in  what  degree. 

SUMMARY 

The  'Community'  theory  endeavors  to  meet  all  the  justifiable 
considerations  presented  in  each  of  the  other  proposals.  It  seeks 
especially  to  avoid  such  a  scheme  of  adjustment  as  would  tend  to 
force  the  individual  to  accept  one  solution  as  against  another.  It 
leaves  all  the  forces  working;  they  are  to  decide  what  the  future  is  to 
be.  Both  the  'Americanization'  and  'Federation  of  Nationalities' 
theories  presume  too  much  to  'fix'  conditions;  the  one  would  make 
the  citizen  conform  to  the  nature  of  a  mythical  Anglo-Saxon,  and  the 
other  to  harmonize  with  the  soul  assumed  to  reside  in  the  ethnos. 
The  contention  of  the  'Community'  theory  is  that  neither  of  these 


118  THEORIES   OF  AMERICANIZATION 

facts  can  so  easily  be  taken  for  granted,  and  urges  that  all  forces  be 
given  a  just  opportunity  to  exert  their  influence.  If  these  conditions 
are  granted  and  the  ethnic  group  perpetuates  itself,  only  then  does  it 
become  justified  to  the  reason.  On  the  other  hand,  if  the  ethnic 
group  finally  disintegrates,  the  'Community'  theory  really  resolves 
itself  into  the  'Melting  Pot'  theory,  accomplishing  the  fusion  without 
the  evils  of  hasty  assimilation.  Its  essential  merit  is  that  it  rejects 
the  doctrine  of  predestination;  it  conceives  the  life  of  the  individual 
to  be  formed  not  in  accordance  with  some  preconceived  theory  but 
as  a  result  of  the  interaction  of  his  own  nature  with  the  richest 
environment.  In  this  it  satisfies  the  basic  notion  of  democracy  that 
the  individual  must  be  left  free  to  develop  through  forces  selected  by 
the  laws  of  his  own  nature,  not  moulded  by  factors  determined  upon 
by  others  either  in  the  interest  of  themselves  or  in  accordance  with  an 
assumed  good. 

So,  too,  a  comparison  with  our  three  criteria,  the  unique  individual, 
enrichment  of  environment,  and  dependence  upon  social  institutions, 
finds  the  'Community'  theory  the  most  adequate  solution.  It  pro- 
vides in  greatest  measure  for  conceiving  the  individual  as  creator  of 
and  participant  in  the  culture  to  be  evolved,  and  allows  at  the  same 
time  for  a  great  degree  of  individual  diversification.  It  strives  for  a 
culture  enriched  by  the  contributions  from  many  cultures  and  thus 
multiplies  the  possibilities  of  varied  experience.  It  intensifies  the  idea 
of  duty  and  responsibility  to  social  life  and  institutions  by  adding  the 
ethnic  group  and  all  the  significant  institutions  connected  with  its 
history  to  the  burden  of  civilization  that  each  developed  citizen  must 
bear.  It  offers  the  greatest  opportunity  for  the  creation  of  a  free, 
rich  and  lofty  Personality. 


THE  VALUE  OF  ETHNIC  GROUPS 


CHAPTER  IV 
THE  VALUE  OF  ETHNIC  GROUPS 

I 

THE  BASIS  OF  EVALUATION 

The  defense  of  the  right  of  the  ethnic  group  to  preserve  its  identity 
is  usually  based  upon  a  claim  to  unique  cultural  possessions.  This  is 
well  illustrated  in  the  tendency  to  seek  in  Judaism  peculiar  values,  a 
mode  of  thought,  a  theology  or  a  moral  code.  Jewish  apologists  and 
protagonists  both  go  about  the  task  with  the  implication  that  Israel 
may  continue  to  live  only  if  it  have  a  unique  contribution  to  make 
different  from  and  superior  to  what  might  be  made  by  another  group. 
Such  an  approach  is  altogether  indefensible.  The  ethnic  group  is  not 
a  system  of  ideas  but  a  nationality,  a  community  of  persons;  it  is  a 
living  reality  related,  indeed,  to  thought,  but  still  flesh  and  blood 
and  desire  and  no  mere  pale  abstraction.  In  considering  whether  a 
person  is  worthy  of  living  or  not,  we  do  not  require  that  he  be  indis- 
pensable for  the  conduct  of  the  nation  or  of  the  world.  We  do  not 
seek  in  him  a  virtue  which  no  one  else  possesses  in  any  degree  or  a 
faculty  that  is  unique.  Were  such  a  test  applied  to  each  individual, 
perhaps  all  men  would  be  morally  bound  to  commit  suicide.  Even 
geniuses  are  not  indispensable.  It  is  enough  that  each  one  is  unique 
and  serves  along  with  the  rest.  In  any  case  each  man's  individuality, 
even  though  unique,  is  made  up  of  common  human  qualities  and  aspi- 
rations. So,  too,  every  nation1  must  be  conceived  as  a  personality 
unique  but  not  altogether  different;  serving  but  not  indispensable. 
Some  nations  are  greater,  some  more  gifted,  some  have  longer  and 
richer  traditions — but  they  are  all  nations  and  each  has  the  same  right 

*It  is  sometimes  objected  that  the  analogy  between  individual  and  nation  is  not 
correct,  that  it  is  not  necessary  to  justify  the  life  of  the  individual  because  instinctive 
forces  keep  him  alive,  while  the  life  of  the  nation  depends  upon  habits  and  attitudes 
which  have  been  acquired  and  need  to  be  perpetuated.  This  argument  might  indeed 
be  to  the  point  had  we  in  mind  to  create  new  peoples  or  to  resurrect  dead  ones.  But 
we  are  discussing  living  peoples  with  a  desire  to  maintain  identity.  The  will  to  live 
is  the  fact  which  must  be  reckoned  with,  whether  it  is  innate  or  acquired. 

1*1 


122  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

to  live.  It  is  not  necessary  to  show  that  each  nation  has  certain 
characteristics,  without  which  the  world  would  not  get  along,  or 
which  no  other  nation  has  in  any  degree.  It  is  not  necessary  to  prove 
that  if  it  should  perish,  either  liberty,  or  justice,  or  religion,  or  the 
ethical  life  would  perish  from  the  earth.  However  great  its  contribu- 
tion in  these  fields  may  be,  it  cannot  have  a  monopoly  in  these  things, 
nor  should  that  be  expected. 

Our  own  argument  for  the  perpetuation  of  the  foreign  ethnic  groups 
in  the  United  States  has  been  based  not  upon  any  demonstration  of 
the  value  of  the  cultural  contribution  that  any  such  group  might 
make  but  upon  the  right  to  life  and  expression  of  personality  inherent 
in  the  nature  of  the  individual.  Incidentally,  indeed,  it  has  been 
assumed  that  some  of  them,  at  least,  will  contribute  to  the  develop- 
ment and  to  the  enrichment  of  our  own  culture.  But  throughout 
the  whole  discussion  the  fundamental  position  has  been  that  in  a 
democracy  no  demonstration  of  value  is  needed  precedent  to  permit- 
ting either  an  individual  or  a  group  to  live.  The  validity  of  an  experi- 
ence cannot  be  demonstrated  to  any  one  who  has  not  undergone, 
either  actually  or  by  sympathetic  imagination,  a  similar  experience. 
There  is  no  reason,  furthermore,  why  it  should  justify  itself  to  anyone 
else  except  where  it  also  affects  another  person  in  an  appreciable 
degree.  Music  does  not  justify  itself  by  an  appeal  to  those  who  have 
no  ear  for  music,  but  by  the  opinion  of  the  musicians.  Philosophy, 
too,  is  justified  because,  for  the  philosopher,  the  unthinking  life  is 
not  worth  living.  So  the  ultimate  judgment  of  the  value  of  the  ethnic 
group  must  be  in  the  experience  of  the  person  who  has  lived  the  life  of 
the  ethnic  group.  Life  justifies  itself.  It  is  the  suppression  of  life 
that  needs  justification.  Indeed,  if  it  is  clearly  shown  that  the 
presence  or  activities  of  any  particular  group  cannot  be  continued 
except  at  the  expense  of  other  groups  or  of  the  total  group,  then 
its  activities  must  be  restrained  within  just  bounds,  or  altogether 
eliminated  when  there  is  no  other  way  out.  However,  when  no 
impartial  demonstration  of  the  evil  effects  of  the  presence  of  any  group 
is  possible,  then  'tolerance'  must  be  Democracy's  rule;  the  further 
assumption  being  that  any  such  'tolerated'  group,  which  has  no 
contribution  to  make,  must  of  itself  become  disintegrated  under  the 


THE  VALUE  OF  ETHNIC  GROUPS  123 

influences  which  are  bound  to  play  upon  it  in  the  presence  of  the  free 
interchange  of  currents  of  thought  and  life  characteristic  of  a  true 
democracy.  The  burden  of  proof  always  lies  upon  those  who  would 
curtail  an  activity,  especially  when  such  action  implies  the  negation 
of  the  aspirations  of  persons. 

Such  a  position  is  the  logical  conclusion  of  our  democratic  assump- 
tion which  maintains  that  the  subjects  of  experience  are  the  primary 
judges  of  life's  values.  Nevertheless,  a  reasonable  person,  not  too 
much  concerned  with  the  conclusions  of  logic,  may  feel  unsatisfied 
with  such  a  strict  position,  in  spite  of  the  rational  assent  which  he 
may  feel  forced  to  give  to  the  line  of  argument.  Granting  to  the 
ethnic  group  the  right  to  maintain  its  identity,  one  may  still  wish  to 
know  why  it  should  avail  itself  of  its  right.  While  still  maintaining 
that  the  ethnic  life  needs  no  a  priori  defense,  this  chapter  dealing 
with  the  value  of  the  ethnic  group  has  been  included  to  add  to  the 
formal,  intellectual  consent  the  force  of  a  moral  conviction.  In  this 
it  is  not  the  intention  to  return  to  the  position  of  the  apologist  who 
lays  claim  to  a  unique  superior  virtue  for  his  people.  We  shall  not 
expect  an  explication  of  a  superior  religion,  ethical  code  or  Weltan- 
schauung. All  that  will  be  done  will  be  to  point  out  several  ways  in 
which  the  ethnic  loyalty  in  general  and  the  Jewish  loyalty  in  parti- 
cular may  be  of  human  significance. 

Needless  to  say,  the  member  of  the  ethnic  group  is  not  necessarily 
motivated  in  a  conscious  manner  by  such  significances.  If  grasped 
at  all,  they  are  gathered  from  fragmentary  experiences.  What  keeps 
the  individual  loyal  to  his  group  is  a  complex  of  daily  lifelong  associa- 
tions whose  satisfactions  are  intimate  and  subtle.  In  any  case  it 
would  be  difficult  to  transmit  the  meaning  of  a  melody,  of  a  witticism, 
or  of  a  ceremony  and  when  these  are  interwoven  with  the  life  and 
history  of  a  foreign  group,  the  task  becomes  well  nigh  impossible. 
It  would  require  learning  the  literature  and  social  life  not  only 
objectively  but  through  living  in  the  society  of  the  people.  Undoubt- 
edly it  is  these  bits  of  "eternity  in  the  narrow  span  of  a  song,"  the 
satisfactions  which  reside  in  the  very  living  and  daily  contact,  which 
build  the  desire  to  perpetuate  the  ethnic  associations  rather  than  the 
very  conscious  humane  values  which  will  be  described  below. 


124  THEORIES   OF  AMERICANIZATION 

But  here,  too,  we  find  a  parallel  with  the  life  of  the  individual. 
Unconscious,  unmoral  forces  make  him  persist.  And  yet  out  of  the 
flux  of  life  can  be  gathered  certain  values  which  are  of  humane 
significance  and  which  make  life  worth  while.  The  attempt  here  then 
will  be  neither  to  recount  the  rich,  individual  experiences  which  in 
reality  furnish  the  motive  forces  for  group  persistence  nor  to  elaborate 
a  theory  calculated  to  convert,  but  to  point  some  values  which  raise 
the  ethnic  loyalty  from  the  plane  of  the  merely  satisfying  to  a  moral, 
ideal  experience. 

II 

SINCERITY  OF  OUTLOOK 

When  Socrates,  disillusioned  but  still  courageous,  ventured  on  the 
quest  for  truth,  he  determined  that  his  primary  task  was  to  know 
himself.  For  all  knowledge  in  the  sense  of  wisdom  is  a  knowledge 
of  the  relationship  of  one's  own  self  to  the  rest  of  the  world,  to  the 
many  persons,  ideas  and  things.  To  understand  how  each  event  which 
we  have  experienced  or  caused  is  connected  up  with  numberless  past 
events  and  to  know  the  possible  effects  that  it  may  have  on  all  the 
rest  of  the  world  and  upon  ourselves  in  the  future,  is  knowledge.  To 
understand  who  we  are,  we  must  understand  our  relationship  to  the 
many  possible  things  in  the  world.  To  understand  the  world  is  the 
same  thing  as  to  understand  the  relations  of  all  things  in  the  world  to 
ourselves.  To  understand  the  world  on  the  hypothesis  that  one  is 
something  else  than  human  is  as  impossible  as  to  conceive  of  move- 
ment in  a  spaceless  world.  The  two  notions  are  correlative. 

One's  nature  and  one's  every  act  is  the  point  of  reference  for  true 
wisdom.  It  makes  no  difference  whether  the  events  that  we  are 
concerned  in  are  the  result  of  our  own  doing  or  not;  the  same  responsi- 
bility of  assuming  the  obligation  of  the  relationship  is  involved.  One 
may  vainly  cry  that  he  did  not  ask  his  parents  to  give  him  birth; 
but  he  must  still  take  the  responsibility  of  his  own  needs  and  of  his 
own  life.  Happening  to  be,  we  must  understand  our  relations  to 
other  beings  who  happen  to  be,  and  the  moral  responsibility  rests  upon 
us  to  gain  deeper  and  deeper  insight  into  the  complexity  of  the 
relationships.  To  close  one's  eyes  to  any  fact  in  one's  life  and  refuse 


THE    VALUE   OF   ETHNIC   GROUPS  125 

to  face  the  consequences  is  to  court  not  only  practical  destruction 
but  also  moral  and  intellectual  disintegration.  Some  facts  are  so 
important  for  our  physical  well-being  that  to  neglect  them  is  to  hazard 
death;  other  suppressions  may  lead  to  abnormal  psychoses.  Even 
when  these  obvious  abnormalities  are  not  the  result,  a  failure  to 
realize  possible  significances  means  failure  to  be  intelligent.  Every 
event  can  be  constructed  into  a  universe,  and  to  do  less  than  one  can 
with  the  events  of  one's  own  life  is  to  be  in  a  sense  morally  derelict. 

Now  a  part  of  the  circumstance  of  every  one  who  is  born  of  a  foreign 
ethnic  group  is  just  this  fact.  Just  as  he  was  born  human,  and  of  the 
male  sex,  and  in  New  York,  he  was  also  born,  let  us  say,  a  Pole. 
His  extraction  is  an  event  which  must  be  reckoned  with  as  every 
other  event,  i.e.,  he  must  recognize  its  significations.  He  may 
ultimately  choose  to  continue  or  to  sever  this  association,  but  the 
necessity  of  reckoning  and  understanding  the  fact  is  basic.  Whether 
his  "consciousness  of  kind"  is  the  result  of  a  certain  racial  composi- 
tion, or  whether  it  is  the  result  of  habits  formed  in  the  early  stages  of 
life  through  association,  the  effect  is  the  same.  The  man  knows 
himself  as  a  Pole.  To  suppress  this  fact  in  his  life  in  order  to  satisfy 
convention  or  public  opinion  is  similar  in  its  effect  upon  moral  integrity 
to  the  suppression  of  instinct.  The  sound,  virile  person  finds  such 
prudery  and  hypocrisy  odious  and  impossible.  It  makes  a  breach  in 
his  character.  The  sincere  person  must  go  about  the  world  recogniz- 
ing and  assuming  responsibility  for  what  he  is.  Then  he  may  hope 
to  get  somewhere. 

The  importance  of  recognizing  the  ethnic  origin  is  enhanced  if  we 
grant  that  there  is  a  possibility  of  connection  between  the  race  and 
the  individual  soul.  Our  own  discussion  has  not  assumed  that  every 
person  born  of  a  foreign  ethnic  group  can  find  his  salvation  only 
through  that  group.  No  such  inevitability  of  connection  can  be 
taken  for  granted.  But  there  is  the  possibility,  even  the  likelihood, 
that  some  can  find  their  highest  expression  of  happiness  only  in  the 
culture  of  the  ethnic  group.  It  is  reasonable  to  suppose  that  in  a 
family  of  musical  reputation  some  of  the  children  have  musical 
genius.  It  is  their  right  to  receive  at  least  the  elements  of  a  musical 
education  to  determine  whether  their  bent  lies  that  way.  So,  too, 


126  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

unless  an  opportunity  is  given  to  the  citizen  of  foreign  extraction  to 
know  his  people,  we  cannot  be  sure  that  we  have  not  violated  or 
crushed  what  is  most  significant  in  him.  The  core  of  truth  in  the 
dictum,  "A  man  cannot  change  his  grandfathers,"  might  be  para- 
phrased, "A  man  dare  not  fail  to  know  who  his  grandfathers  were." 
Especially  when  one  belongs  to  the  Jewish  group  does  the  necessity 
of  reckoning  with  the  fact  of  origin  present  itself.  A  Jew  must  be 
conscious  of  himself,  not  only  because  he  wishes  to,  but  also  because 
the  world  whether  in  malice  or  in  curiosity  singles  him  out  and  makes 
him  so  self-conscious.  The  Jew,  too,  has  played  and  still  plays  such 
a  part  in  the  world  that  the  possible  significances  are  unusually 
varied  and  complex. 

To  teach  one  to  forget  his  ethnic  connection  as  is  proposed  by  the 
'Americanization'  theory  is  to  make  a  breach  in  the  moral  foundation 
of  one's  character.  An  experience  may  be  surpassed  or  understood; 
but  to  forget  it  is  not  moral.  Of  all  the  immoralities  in  the  world 
lack  of  memory  and  lack  of  imagination  are  the  joint  parents.  Our 
educational  system  can  never  mean  much  unless  it  realizes  that  wisdom 
must  be  based  on  understanding  of  experience  and  instinct.  What 
a  tragically  superficial  insight  is  revealed  in  the  failure  to  understand 
that  the  welfare  of  the  nation  is  bound  up  above  all  with  sincerity  of 
character ! 

The  knowledge  which  men  have,  if  it  is  to  remain  true,  cannot 
consist  of  collections  of  memorized  phrases  conceived  of  as  universally 
applicable.  If  a  man  is  to  remain  whole,  there  must  be  an  integra- 
tion in  his  character.  His  instincts  must  be  related  to  his  experience, 
his  former  habits  to  his  later  associations.  The  various  phases  of  his 
environment  must  be  related  to  his  growing  self.  A  complete  unifica- 
tion of  character  is  attainable,  in  the  midst  of  our  complex  and  rushed 
environment  with  its  abrupt  transitions,  by  comparatively  few. 
And  for  those  few  it  is  attainable  only  through  a  sincere  recognition 
of  what  they  are.  To  one  who  has  been  born  in  a  relationship  to  a 
foreign  ethnic  group  such  an  integration  of  character  is  not  ultimately 
possible  without  a  full  realization  of  the  significance  of  this  connection. 


THE   VALUE   OF   ETHNIC   GROUPS  127 

III 

LOYALTY  TO  A  MINORITY 

To  the  thoughtful  member  of  a  foreign  ethnic  community  loyalty 
to  a  minority  becomes  a  severe  mental  and  moral  discipline.  His 
mode  of  life,  his  religious  views,  his  evaluations  are  all  called  into 
question  by  the  presence  of  the  dominant  current  of  thought.  He 
must  answer  not  only  to  the  satisfaction  of  his  neighbors  but  also 
(what  is  spiritually  even  more  difficult)  to  the  satisfaction  of  himself. 
His  life  is  brought  up  from  beneath  the  psychological  threshold  to  the 
plane  of  conscious  understanding.  He  must  justify  his  ways  to  him- 
self. If  he  survives  in  his  loyalty,  his  life  must  be  more  highly  self- 
conscious  and  rationalized  than  it  need  be  for  him  who  accepts  current 
ways  and  modes  of  thought  which  are  socially  approved.  He  cannot 
follow  the  ethnic  tradition  blindly  for  it  is  constantly  subject  to  criti- 
cism by  the  standards  of  the  new  life.  He  tends,  therefore,  to  select 
and  to  perpetuate  only  those  elements  in  the  group  culture  which  are 
of  significance. 

Likewise  his  loyalty  to  America  tends  to  be  raised  from  the  level 
of  easy  acquiescence  with  the  established  order  and  the  majority 
and  from  a  purely  emotional  chauvinistic  support  to  the  plane  of 
criticism  by  standards  and  rational  appreciation.  Forced  to  find 
worth  and  beauty  in  his  own  people's  life  to  sanction  his  loyalty  he 
carries  over  the  same  habit  of  thought  in  thinking  of  the  new  culture. 
America  makes  him  ask  himself,  "Why  is  the  heritage  of  my  people 
worth  preserving?"  In  finding  a  reply  he  cannot  fail  to  begin  to 
compare  and  to  seek  to  understand  what  is  truly  profound  and  spiri- 
tual in  American  life.  For  his  loyalty  is  not  to  the  land  as  such, 
he  has  not  lived  here  long  enough;  nor  to  its  people,  he  does  not  know 
them  well  enough;  but  primarily  to  the  ideal  America  about  which 
he  has  thought  and  dreamed.  Trained  to  seek  below  the  surface  of 
his  own  tradition,  he  will  tend  to  look  for  what  is  exalted  in  American 
life  and  to  base  his  loyalty  upon  a  conscious  realization  of  the  signifi- 
cance of  America. 

In  a  deep  sense  he  learns  that  the  right  is  not  always  with  the 
mighty.  Perhaps  the  greatest  obstacle  to  liberalism  and  a  progres- 


128  THEORIES    OF   AMERICANIZATION 

sive  civilization  is  the  fact  that  men  still  believe  in  their  hearts  that 
might  makes  right  in  spite  of  their  professed  belief  in  the  religions  of 
righteousness  that  have  sprung  from  the  East.  But  the  member  of 
the  minority  group  has  it  borne  in  upon  him  through  his  personal 
experience  that  the  majority  may  be  in  the  wrong,  may  fail  to  under- 
stand, may  be  spiritually  obtuse.  His  sympathies  are  extended  to 
the  struggle  of  minorities  all  over  the  world  and  he  gains  insight  into 
the  life  of  peoples  who  are  not  of  the  politically  dominant  races. 

IV 

MULTIPLE  CULTURAL  LOYALTY 

Those  who  have  broken  with  the  group  usually  consider  themselves 
'broadminded.'  The  loyalty  to  a  minority  ethnic  group  is  often 
conceived  of  as  narrowing.  When  the  allegiance  had  been  given 
blindly  and  exclusively  to  the  family  tradition,  this  may  be  true. 
But  when  it  is  given  intelligently  and  with  discrimination,  without 
yielding  the  allegiance  to  the  State  and  culture  it  represents,  the 
double  loyalty  becomes  a  powerful  force  toward  humanization. 

The  knowledge  of  another  language,  another  history,  and  another 
point  of  view,  is  in  itself  a  liberalizing  influence.  All  additional 
knowledge  is  protection  against  indoctrination — a  freeing  of  the  mind. 
Knowledge  of  other  peoples  is  not  necessarily  an  allegiance.  One 
may  know  very  much  about  German  philosophy  and  literature  and 
yet  not  approve  of  them.  Nevertheless,  in  the  literature  and  culture 
of  every  developed  nation  humane  elements  will  be  found — interests 
and  thoughts  which  conceive  of  life  not  from  the  narrow  nationalistic 
point  of  view,  but  from  the  broadly  human,  universal  outlook. 
Knowledge  of  these  brings  with  it  an  appreciation  which  is  psychologi- 
cally an  incipient  loyalty.  In  so  far  as  we  have  a  love  for  foreign 
and  ancient  literatures  and  languages,  we  have  the  beginnings  of  an 
allegiance  towards  them.  When  this  appreciation  reaches  out  into 
the  plane  of  action,  when  in  addition  to  the  intellectual  and  aesthetic 
appreciation  there  is  involved  also  the  emotional  appreciation 
imperative  to  further  these  activities,  then  a  loyalty  has  come  into 
being.  When  the  notion  of  duty  enters,  then  the  allegiance  has  been 


THE   VALUE   OF   ETHNIC   GROUPS  129 

pledged.  And  it  is  here,  where  emotions  and  actions  are  involved, 
that  a  multiple  loyalty  becomes  especially  significant. 

For  emotions  and  actions  are  subject  to  conflict,  and  conflict  tends 
to  be  resolved  into  harmony.  The  need  of  furthering  two  distinct 
cultures  must  lead  to  an  elimination  of  those  elements  which  are 
mutually  incompatible  and  to  the  emphasis  upon  those  elements 
in  each  which  have  a  universal  interest.  Each  group  culture  contains 
within  it  elements  of  an  international  character,  and  attention 
must  be  centered  upon  these  if  both  loyalties  are  to  be  retained. 
As  in  the  individual,  the  variety  of  conflicting  instincts  and  emotions 
must  lead  to  a  process  of  elimination,  modification  and  development 
resulting  in  the  creation  of  a  rational  philosophy  and  mode  of  life,  so, 
too,  allegiance  to  more  than  one  social  group  must  lead  to  a  larger 
view  of  life  because  it  brings  more  knowledge  and  appreciation,  but 
especially  because  the  loyalties  are  under  the  necessity  of  rationaliza- 
tion. 

It  was  not  because  they  had  a  double  allegiance  that  hyphenated 
Americans  were  odious.  It  was  because  in  their  case  the  hyphen  was  a 
pretense  or  considered  to  be  so,  and  used  in  order  to  hide  the  actual 
fact  of  a  single  rival  allegiance  to  a  foreign  government.  Had  they 
been  true  hyphenates,  owing  equal  allegiance  to  both  peoples  and 
really  equally  interested  in  the  welfare  of  both,  they  would  have  been 
led  to  judge  not  from  prejudice,  but  from  the  rule  of  right.  And 
from  the  moral  viewpoint  at  least,  there  could  be  nothing  better. 
It  is  just  the  presence  of  true  hypenates,  men  who  loved  other  nations 
as  they  did  this,  that  gave  our  purposes  in  the  war  aims  more  truly 
human  and  less  selfish  than  could  otherwise  have  been  possible. 

The  significance  of  a  double  allegiance,  it  should  be  noted,  is  greater 
than  twice  a  single  allegiance.  Double  here  means  multiple.  The 
knowledge  of  an  additional  language  and  culture  and  the  understand- 
ing of  another  people  means  not  only  a  personality  richer  by  so  much. 
It  means  rather  what  an  additional  dimension  does  in  spatial  relations. 
It  gives  perspective.  It  opens  up  the  mind  to  a  new  concept;  there 
are  other  nations  than  one's  own.  The  change  of  view  is  of  significance 
not  only  for  the  additional  nationality  for  which  the  interest  is  aroused 
but  for  the  whole  mental  outlook.  It  prevents  the  mind  from  falling 


130  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

into  the  natural  tendency  of  imagining  that  one's  own  culture  is  the 
only  culture  worthy  of  the  name,  and  one's  own  countrymen,  the 
only  real  humans.  Interest  in  another  nationality  must  go  far 
toward  giving  one  an  international,  as  against  a  provincial  outlook. 
Differences  are  seen  more  readily  in  their  proportion;  it  is  under- 
stood that  humanity  can  speak  in  other  languages,  express  itself  in 
other  cultures,  exist  in  other  physiognomies. 

True  universalization,  colloquially  called  'broadmindedness,'  can 
come  only  through  the  multiplication  of  loyalties,  not  through  the 
suppression  of  them,  just  as  true  spirituality  comes  from  the 
addition  of  interests  which  must  be  harmonized,  not  through  sup- 
pression of  instincts.  This  is  especially  true  in  the  present  condition 
of  society.  There  is  no  International  Country  to  which  we  might 
give  our  allegiance.  We  must  give  it  to  the  existing  nations  which 
are  all  particularistic.  Otherwise  we  turn  out  in  practical  life  to  be 
disloyal,  however  conscientiously  we  may  be  true  to  our  dreams. 
We  cannot  speak  a  universal  language.  We  may  speak  one  tongue 
or  many.  We  cannot  be  everywhere.  We  must  be  in  one  place  or 
in  many  places.  Universalization  cannot  be  promoted  by  abolition 
of  nations  (they  cannot  be  abolished  by  fiat,  nor  can  an  international 
humanity  be  created  by  fiat)  but  by  the  multiplication  of  the  number 
of  nations  toward  which  we  feel  sympathetic,  leading  to  an  emphasis 
upon  the  international  elements  in  each  nation. 

There  is,  of  course,  the  well  recognized  danger  in  such  a  multipli- 
cation of  allegiance.  It  sometimes  permits  a  double  and  sinister 
political  allegiance  to  mask  under  the  cover  of  a  cultural  interest. 
Sometimes,  too,  the  humane  interest  may  lead  to  a  political  allegiance 
conflicting  with  patriotism.  When  this  leads  to  the  ascendancy  of 
right  as  against  selfish  national  prejudice,  then  it  cannot  be  con- 
sidered as  anything  but  beneficial.  When  it  leads  to  the  loyalty  to 
a  foreign  government  as  against  right,  it  is  reprehensible.  But  the 
chances  for  such  an  unrighteous  foreign  allegiance  are  small  under  the 
influence  of  our  own  environment,  provided  that  our  scheme  of  educa- 
tion is  such  as  is  assumed  here,  where  every  child  must  attend  the 
public  schools.  When  such  a  disloyal  foreign  allegiance  does  occur, 
it  must  be  treated  as  a  separate  problem.  We  do  not  maintain  that 


THE  VALUE  OF  ETHNIC  GROUPS  131 

people  should  not  heed  their  conscience,  because  that  may  lead  to  the 
conscientious  objector,  who  is,  as  we  think,  unreasonable  in  his  plea 
of  conscience  and,  in  effect,  though  not  in  motive,  disloyal.  We  do 
not  suppress  individuality  because  its  expression  sometines  leads 
to  selfishness.  Nor  should  we  suppress  the  double  cultural  allegiance 
which  is  essentially  humanizing  because  under  present  conditions 
where  war  is  possible  (in  itself  a  most  irrational  condition  in  civilized 
society)  it  may  at  times  create  difficulties. 

Multiple  cultural  allegiance  is  in  itself  a  force  tending  to  remove 
the  likelihood  of  war.  The  notorious  fact  that  international  science, 
art  and  religion  were  of  little  avail  in  stemming  the  tide  of  war  and 
the  surprising  ease  with  which  savants,  social  workers  and  ministers 
found  it  possible  to  lose  sight  of  universal  interests,  even  to  turn 
chauvinists,  should  warn  us  against  expecting  too  much  from  merely 
ideal  bonds.  One's  closest  friends  are  still  for  the  most  part  in  one's 
own  country;  and  control  of  military  and  police  forces,  of  education, 
of  the  means  of  forming  public  opinion  and  of  a  multitude  of  other 
conditions  gives  the  national  government  a  stranglehold  upon  the 
lives  of  its  citizens.  Nevertheless,  the  ever-present  danger  of  conflict 
between  nation  and  nation  can  be  overcome  only  by  a  multiplication 
of  international  ties  until  they  become  numerous  and  strong  enough 
to  bear  the  strain  of  national  separatism.  A  League  of  Nations  can 
become  effective  only  in  so  far  as  it  is  an  expression  of  a  community 
of  international  interests  and  is  based  securely  upon  a  multiplicity 
of  interdependences.  The  further  development  of  communication, 
the  growth  of  economic  interdependence,  the  multiplication  of  many 
forms  of  international  societies  and  above  all  revision  of  education 
so  that  it  may  make  apparent,  not  obscure,  the  existence  of  these 
many  interdependences  must  precede  any  lasting  peace.  Important 
among  these  interrelationships  is  the  consciousness  of  kinship  rising 
out  of  the  multiple  cultural  allegiance.  It  is  significant  that  the 
presence  of  foreign  ethnic  groups  gave  us  great  concern  during  the 
war.  Only  the  conviction  that  the  Central  Powers  had  violated  the 
peace  of  the  world  could  break  the  force  of  this  international  bond. 
On  the  other  hand,  our  best  evidence  that  double  allegiances  are 
not  fatal  comes  from  the  experience  of  the  war.  The  presence  of 


132  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

hyphenated  Americans  did  not  prevent  us  from  winning  the  war. 
Perhaps  it  even  aided  us  for  it  forced  us  to  become  clear  as  to  our 
purposes.  How  could  the  many  conflicting  loyalties  of  our  varie- 
gated population  be  met?  Only  by  a  stand  that  was  above  national 
prejudice  could  we  be  united  for  the  tremendous  undertaking.  The 
multiple  loyalty  enhances  the  quality  of  patriotism  and  raises  it  to 
the  level  of  an  international  interest. 

Loyalty  to  a  minority  ethnic  group,  in  addition  to  enriching  the 
general  culture,  promotes  the  spiritualization  of  the  individual's 
aims  and  purposes.  It  tends  to  make  his  outlook  more  universal, 
his  perspective  international,  his  approval  to  lie  on  the  plane  of  intelli- 
gent conscious  justification.  He  remains  near  to  those  intimacies 
of  close  family  relationship  which  seem  basic  to  a  real  human  touch 
and  understanding;  but  he  must  still  maintain  an  open  mind  towards 
divergences.  His  sympathies  remain  deep  while  they  are  broadened. 
Understanding  the  keen  and  intense  woes  and  joys  that  are  possible 
when  one  lives  in  close  proximity  to  those  with  whom  one  feels  an 
emotional  and  almost  sensuous  consciousness  of  kind,  the  sympathies 
are  broadened  and  extended  to  a  reach  of  international  scope,  where 
the  unities  are  broadly  humane,  and  the  kinship  is  on  the  plane  of  the 
intelligent. 

These  are  general  values  which  arise  out  of  a  multiple  allegiance. 
In  addition,  each  particular  group  will  contribute  in  accordance  with 
its  own  gifts  and  culture.  No  association  of  men  capable  of  social 
coherence  and  self -consciousness  and  tending  to  maintain  its  identity 
midst  conditions  which  naturally  would  disintegrate  them  can  be 
conceived  of  as  being  altogether  without  a  culture.  How  much  each 
group  can  contribute  will  depend  upon  the  excellence  of  its  cultural 
accomplishments.  The  whole  range  of  contribution  may  extend 
from  cooking  recipes,  quaint  melodies  and  legends,  through  customs, 
conventions,  folkways,  to  language,  literature,  ethics,  social  oraniza- 
tion  and  religion.  To  describe  these  even  briefly  for  the  Jewish 
group  alone  would  require  volumes  and  the  work  of  many  masters. 
In  the  following  pages  it  is  the  intention  not  to  attempt  to  evaluate 
Judaism  or  describe  the  Jewish  heritage,  but  to  present  several  ideas 
which  will  give  some  hint  of  the  depth  and  meaning  of  Jewish  life. 


THE   VALUE   OF   ETHNIC   GROUPS  133 


THE  HEBREW  LANGUAGE  AND  LITERATURE 

Greek  literature,  Professor  Woodbridge  has  pointed  out,  bears  a 
unique  relationship  to  Western  philosophic  notions.  Greek  thought 
is  reflection  upon  experience  spontaneous  and  original.  Western 
philosophy  is  in  great  part  a  translation  of  the  terms  used  to  describe 
this  experience.  Between  the  original  words  and  the  translation  a 
whole  system  of  thought  is  often  interpolated.  Thus  the  unsophisti- 
cated "?)  apXTQ  (the  beginning)  of  Greek  literature,  becomes  the  Latin 
'principium' and  the  English  'principles' with  the  implication  that  there 
are  underlying  principles  at  the  beginning  of  things.  The  significance 
of  this  difference  lies  not  alone  in  the  fact  that  Greek  literature  must 
be  read  in  the  original  to  prevent  a  perversion  of  thought.  Even 
more  important,  the  original  writings,  since  they  describe  experience 
significantly,  must  remain  permanent  sources  of  reflection  and  of 
intellectual  life,  while  Western  modes  of  philosophy,  being  translation, 
must  become  out  of  date  as  the  current  system  of  thought  gives  way. 

The  Hebrew  writings  collected  in  the  Bible  bear  a  similar  relation- 
ship to  Western  ethical  and  religious  conceptions  that  Greek  literature 
bears  to  the  intellectual  life.  The  Hebrew  writings  were  literature 
before  they  became  dogma.  To  read  them  in  the  original  is  sufficient 
to  divest  them  of  the  conventional  theology.  The  poet  giving  expres- 
sion to  the  prayer  of  his  people  in  defeat  cries,  "Come  and  help  us." 
The  translation  has  it,  "Come  and  save  us."  The  one  thought  will 
remain  a  natural  appeal  as  long  as  men  are  capable  of  conceiving 
themselves  in  distress;  the  second  idea  suggests  a  sense  of  unreality 
that  causes  the  secularist  to  smile.  The  Prophets'  fierce  cry  for  justice, 
intense  with  social  realism,  loses  its  passionate  force  midst  the  theologic 
phraseology.  There  are  also  errors  due  to  mistranslation1  in  support 
of  certain  traditions  as  well  as  those  that  have  crept  in  unconsciously 
as  a  result  of  the  overshadowing  conception.  A  knowledge  of  Hebrew 
furnishes  the  key  to  a  natural  understanding  of  Biblical  literature 
and  opens  the  gate  to  free  interpretation.  Hebrew,  moreover,  has 

1As  in  the  translation,  Virgin,'  where  the  text  means  simply  'young  woman'  and 
though  there  is  a  distinct  word  to  signify  virginity.  See  Skinner  on  Isaiah  VII,  Cam- 
bridge Series. 


134  THEORIES  OF   AMERICANIZATION 

the  additional  advantage  that  it  is  a  living  language  and  the  connota- 
tions of  its  concepts  can  be  learned  more  directly  and  truly.  Un- 
doubtedly, the  meanings  have  undergone  changes  through  the 
centuries  of  Jewish  history.  But  the  development  has  been  gradual 
and  continuous  and  changes  of  significance  can  be  traced  with  no 
great  difficulty,  while  in  the  case  of  the  classic  tongues  an  abrupt 
translation  must  be  made  in  thought.  If  a  considerable  portion  of 
our  population  could  acquire  a  literary  knowledge  of  Greek  and  Greek 
literature,  it  would  undoubtedly  lead  to  an  enrichment  of  our  cultural 
and  aesthetic  life.  It  can  be  of  no  less  significance  to  further  a  knowl- 
edge of  Hebrew  and  its  literature.  The  loyalty  to  the  Jewish  group 
affords  an  unusual  opportunity  of  obtaining  an  insight  into  one  of 
the  richest  sources  of  the  world's  spiritual  experience  which  has  been 
particularly  influential  in  the  literature  and  in  the  mode  of  life  of 
the  English  speaking  peoples. 

The  Jewish  mind  seems  to  have  been  keenly  aware  of  the  intimate 
relationship  between  its  language  and  its  thought  life.  Side  by  side 
with  the  Jewish  struggle  for  perpetuation  has  gone  an  insistence  upon 
the  retention  of  Hebrew.  With  the  national  reawakening  has  come 
a  renascence  of  Hebrew  literature  and  a  revival  of  Hebrew  as  a  spoken 
tongue.  But  it  is  of  significance  to  note  that  even  in  Yiddish,  the 
colloquial  tongue  of  Eastern  European  Jewry,  which  is  based  on  a 
German  of  the  fourteenth  century,  the  ideas  indicating  important 
ethical  and  religious  concepts  are  never  translated  but  always  retained 
in  the  original  Hebrew.  One  does  not  speak  of  Religion,  Glaube,  Wohl- 
thdtigheit  in  Yiddish  but  of  iron  ,rwON  ,npt¥,  words  which  have  different 
roots  and  connotations.  To  understand  Yiddish  it  is  necessary  to  know 
hundreds  of  Hebrew  concepts.  For  one  who  does  not  know  Hebrew, 
Yiddish  is  an  excellent  medium  for  the  interpretation  of  Jewish  life. 
Those  who  despise  Yiddish  as  a  jargon  have  really  failed  to  grasp 
the  significance  of  this  mixture  of  languages.  It  was  a  successful 
compromise  with  the  environment.  For  the  masses  who  could  not 
speak  Hebrew  the  current  tongue  was,  so  to  speak,  converted  to 
Judaism. 

The  social  significance  of  retaining  Jewish  concepts  in  the  Hebrew 
can  become  clear  through  the  description  of  the  word 


THE  VALUE  OF  ETHNIC  GROUPS  135 

(rahamonut,  usually  translated  'compassion') .  In  discussing  the 
social  instincts,  Thorndike  lays  stress  upon  what  he  calls  the  instinct  of 
'motherly  behavior,'  which  he  portrays  in  terms  of  stimulus  and 
response  as,  "a  living  thing  displaying  hungry,  frightened  or  pained  be- 
havior, by  wailing,  clinging,  holding  out  its  arms  and  the  like,  provokes 
attention  and  discomfort,  and  may  provoke  acts  of  relief."  (Educa- 
tional Psychology,  Vol.  I,  p.  102).  Of  this  instinct,  the  noted  psycho- 
logist says  elsewhere,  "Modern  philanthropy  and  the  acceptance  of 
the  brotherhood  of  man  as  a  living  creed  rests  at  bottom  on  this 
original  tendency."  Thorndike  notes  the  inadequacy  of  the  term, 
'motherly  behavior,'  to  describe  the  instinct;  it  gives  a  false  conno- 
tation for  the  instinct  is  present  in  various  degrees  in  all  human  beings. 
In  fact  English  has  no  good  equivalent.  The  word  'pity'  brings  a 
sense  of  separation  between  subject  and  object;  'kindliness'  and  'sym- 
pathy' lack  the  connotation  of  distress  and  the  latter  may  be  wholly 
intellectual  or  aesthetic;  'compassion'  which  comes  closest  is  too  classic 
and  cold.  It  occurred  to  the  writer  that  the  Hebrew  word  nUDfi"! 
conveyed  in  a  remarkably  true  sense  both  the  meaning  and  emotional 
quality,  so  well  indeed  that  it  carries  the  intent  of  the  definition 
even  better  than  does  the  description  given  above.  It  contains  both 
the  notion  of  distress  and  kinship  in  suffering.  Mirabile  dictu,  the 
root  of  the  word  DID  (rehem-womb)  indicates  the  maternal  and  kin- 
ship relation  which  Thorndike's  term  aims  to  convey.  The  word 
also  means  to  be  tender  and  loving  (r  u  h  a  m  ah — Hosea,  Chap.  I) 
Furthermore,  it  has  a  central  position  in  Jewish  thought.  God  is 
Dim $>K  (elr ahum — God  compassionate)  and  Israel  D'Jl>nVJ3 D'JDTTi 
(rahamonim  b'ne  rahamoni  m — the  compassionate, 
children  of  the  compassionate).  But  most  important  of  all  is  the 
relation  of  the  word  to  Jewish  psychology.  The  mere  utterance  of 
the  word  is  sufficient  to  evoke  a  psychological,  almost  a  physiological 
response.  In  speaking  before  a  Jewish  audience,  it  is  a  word  to  conjure 
with.  As  the  American  orator  would  use  the  word  'liberty'  as  a 
means  of  arousing  emotion,  the  Jewish  orator  would  make  his  appeal 
on  the  basis  of  nuom.  There  is  undoubtedly  more  than  a  chance 
connection  between  these  various  facts;  the  Jewish  emphasis  on  the 
social  attitude  and  the  ethical  tradition,  the  central  position  of  the 


136  THEORIES   OF  AMERICANIZATION 

family  and  the  conception  of  the  Messianic  age  as  a  brotherhood, 
the  conception  of  Israel  and  Israel's  God  as  D'JDrn  together  with  the 
fact  that  for  the  instinct  which  lies  at  the  basis  of  the  social  attitude 
the  Hebrew  has  a  remarkably  good  term.  The  word  has  become  an 
institution  and  a  motivating  force  in  the  life  of  the  people.  Translate 
it  and  you  have  dissipated  energy.  How  much  history  would  need 
to  be  lived  again  to  make  'freedom'  a  word  to  rouse  men  with.  Revo- 
lutions and  civil  wars  would  need  to  be  fought  and  countless  martyr- 
doms experienced.  So  nuom  was  created  through  centuries  of 
travail. 

To  read  Hebrew  means  to  understand  the  symbols  of  what  the 
Jewish  People  has  conceived  to  be  its  most  significant  experiences. 
It  means,  of  course,  more  than  to  read  words  of  a  different  force  and 
connotation.  To  read  another  language  means  to  read  other  matter 
as  well  as  other  meanings.  Each  people  retains  in  its  body  of  classic 
literature  those  writings  which  are  especially  appealing  and  in  which 
it  excels.  All  Hebrew  literature  is  so  permeated  with  religious  and 
ethical  thought  that  any  modern  writer  of  Hebrew,  whether  in  agree- 
ment with  or  in  revolt  against  the  traditional  conceptions,  cannot  help 
but  make  his  writings  reminiscent  of  the  ideas  which  have  been 
for  ages  in  the  foreground  of  the  nation's  mind.  The  Jews  un- 
consciously realizing  this  have  laid  great  stress  upon  the  teaching  of 
Hebrew  even  in  the  definitely  religious  schools,  while  little  time  or 
none  is  given  to  instruction  in  formal  principles.  This  is  keen  insight 
into  what  is  undoubtedly  a  fact:  that  thought  is  transmitted  more 
surely  through  the  indirect  method  of  teaching  literature  than 
through  the  direct  method  of  the  catechism.  Living  in  a  foreign 
land,  where  social  background  and  atmosphere  are  lacking  and  insti- 
tutions to  a  great  extent  are  torn  from  their  context,  it  is  through  the 
language  and  literature  that  we  can  most  easily  grasp  the  ideal  life 
of  a  people.  Individual  speech  reflects  the  person.  Even  more 
truly  does  the  national  language  and  literature  reflect  the  soul  of  the 
nation;  for  only  that  which  is  harmonious  with  the  people's  ideal 
tends  to  survive.  Institutions  also  must  be  considered  expressions  of 
the  social  idea.  But  they  are  more  under  the  necessity  of  compromise 
and  the  idea  is  more  easily  lost  in  the  performance.  Words  are  more 


THE  VALUE  OF  ETHNIC  GROUPS  137 

free  and,  therefore,  reveal  more  truly  the  aspiration;  they  are  less 
bound  by  the  necessity  of  circumstances  and  by  the  responsibility 
of  reckoning  with  actual  life.  In  our  own  conception  of  a  cultural 
loyalty,  with  the  foreign  political  allegiance  ruled  out,  the  language 
and  the  literature  must  be  the  vital  bond.  In  this  connection  it 
must  be  borne  in  mind  that  for  the  Jews  the  Bible  is  not  the  whole 
of  the  spiritual  and  literary  heritage — rabbinic,  mediaeval  and  modern 
Hebrew  literature  which  has  come  with  the  national  reawakening, 
continues  the  tradition  to  modern  times.  Though  the  later  works 
have  affected  Western  life  but  little,  they  are  in  themselves  vast 
storehouses  of  thought  and  of  great  influence  on  Jewish  life  itself. 
To  the  Jew,  furthermore,  Hebrew  is  an  international  language 
which  symbolizes  Jewish  unity  and  through  which  he  can  communicate 
with  Jews  all  over  the  world.  It  links  him  not  only  with  the  Jewish 
past  but  with  the  Jewish  present.  Hebrew,  a  national  possession, 
thus  tends  to  break  the  barriers  of  time  and  to  cross  the  boundaries 
of  countries.  It  has  in  itself  a  means  for  transcending  the  purely 
national  consciousness  in  the  direction  of  the  international  and 
universal. 

VI 


Jewish  history  traces  its  course  from  the  very  dawn  of  civilization. 
In  it  is  reflected  the  human  race's  struggle  for  life  and  its  ideal  vision. 
The  record  is  crowded  with  prophets,  heroes  and  martyrs;  with  strife, 
defeat  and  triumph;  with  events,  philosophies  and  wisdom.  To 
know  it  is  to  have  a  liberal  education;  for  not  only  is  it  itself  full  with 
the  content  and  significance  of  life  but  into  its  current  stream  the 
histories  of  many  nations.  Jewish  history  may  be  seen  as  the  result 
of  the  interaction  of  the  people  of  Israel  with  various  civilizations 
of  the  ancient  and  modern  world.  Chaldea,  Egypt,  Assyria,  Babylon, 
Greece,  Rome,  Spain,  Russia,  America;  the  Feudal  system,  the 
Church,  the  modern  economic  national  organization  and  the  struggle 
of  democracy  are  bound  up  with  the  fortunes  and  the  purposes  of  the 
Jewish  People.  The  teaching  of  Jewish  history  easily  becomes  a 
pedagogical  device  for  teaching  the  history  of  Western  civilization. 


138  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

With  so  much  of  the  histories  of  nations  in  its  own  body  Jewish 
history,  nevertheless,  presents  a  unique  phenomenon — a  striking 
individuality.  This  small  nation  never  really  strong  in  numbers  or 
physical  resources,  subjected  to  the  disintegrating  force  of  exile, 
has  been  able  to  maintain  its  cohesion  long  after  powerful  empires 
had  crumbled,  because  it  became  convinced  that  its  life  represented  an 
ideal,  mvin  ^apa  K*>K  $>*ot^  D'pn:  V??  Israel  was  not  preserved  except 
for  the  sake  of  the  Torah — so  says  the  teleologist  who  transmutes 
causes  into  purposes.  It  would  be  more  true  to  say  that  Israel  was 
not  preserved  except  through  the  Torah.  Consecration  to  an  idea 
formed  the  bond  of  union  when  the  territorial  boundaries  had  been 
broken. 

There  arises  out  of  the  survival  of  the  Jewish  people  a  profound 
conclusion,  vital  for  moral  progress:  the  exaltation  of  the  power  of 
the  Idea  as  against  the  power  of  environmental  circumstances. 
The  prophet  had  forseen  that  strength  lay  ultimately  not  in  Power 
nor  in  military  strength,  but  in  Spirit.  All  subsequent  Jewish  history 
bears  witness  to  this  conviction.  The  Jewish  People  has  survived 
in  spite  of  untoward  environmental  conditions  because  it  became  self- 
conscious  of  the  meaning  of  its  life.  The  consciousness  of  the  unity 
in  an  ideal  cutting  across  generations,  countries  and  circumstances 
has  made  it  possible  to  maintain  the  national  existence.  The  will  to 
live  and  faith  in  the  purpose  of  his  life  has  found  justification  in  the 
Jewish  Survival.1 


'Perhaps  such  a  statement  of  the  spiritual  cause  for  Jewish  perpetuation  may  strike 
the  sophisticated  student  of  history  as  a  little  sentimental.  But  the  simplicity  of  the 
fact  stands  out  against  the  learned  theories  of  great  historians.  Wellhausen  ends  his 
masterly  essay  on  the  history  of  Israel  and  Judah  saying,  "The  persistency  of  the  race 
may,  of  course,  prove  a  harder  thing  to  overcome  than  Spinoza  has  supposed;  but, 
nevertheless,  he  will  be  found  to  have  spoken  truly  in  declaring  that  the  so-called 
emancipation  of  the  Jews  must  inevitably  lead  to  the  extinction  of  Judaism  wherever 
the  process  is  extended  beyond  the  political  to  the  social  sphere.  For  the  accomplish- 
ment of  this,  centuries  may  be  required."  Wellhausen  is  in  all  likelihood  wrong; 
keenly  aware  of  the  threatening  danger,  the  Jewish  people  is  already  readjusting  itself 
to  meet  the  changed  environmental  conditions  through  the  rebuilding  of  Zion  and  new 
forms  of  adjustment  to  Western  democracies.  The  cause  of  the  error  is  in  the  method 
of  judging  Jewish  history.  Wellhausen  sees  it  altogether  as  the  resultof  environmental 
forces.  Jewish  history  cannot  be  written  without  due  consideration  of  the  Jewish 
will  to  live.  Jewish  history  must  be  seen  not  only  as  a  resultant  of  environmental 
forces,  but  as  a  resultant  of  the  interaction  of  the  Jewish  personality  with  the  environ- 
mental forces. 


THE   VALUE   OF   ETHNIC   GROUPS  139 

Opposed  to  this  belief  in  the  power  of  conscious  will  has  arisen  the 
idea  that  men  are  creatures  of  accident  and  environment,  which  finds 
aphoristic  expression  in  the  phrase,  "Der  Mensch  ist  was  er  isst." 
Experience  with  life  has  indeed  shown  us  that  hope  and  the  will  are 
not  absolutely  free.  Mind  is  not  independent  of  matter;  hope  and 
faith  and  will  are  not  exercised  in  a  vacuum.  But  Jewish  history 
doggedly  maintains  the  belief  in  the  ultimate  supremacy  of  the  inner 
forces,  and  its  own  experience  gives  a  justification  to  what  might 
otherwise  seem  a  groundless  faith.  In  this  sense  the  Jewish  people  is, 
indeed,  a  "witness  unto  the  Lord."  Will  is  the  master  of  circum- 
stances, hope  the  guide  of  experience,  and  conscious  purpose  the  con- 
queror of  life. 

In  the  possible  truth  of  this  faith  in  man's  aspirations  lies  the 
possibility  of  salvation  for  the  world.  It  is  through  aspirations  and 
ideas  that  mankind,  midst  racial,  geographic  and  governmental 
diversities,  can  ultimately  hope  to  become  unified.  The  rational, 
not  the  accidental,  must  become  the  basis  of  community.  In  the 
advance  of  the  world  toward  international  organization  hope  must 
rest  upon  the  confidence  that  common  ideas  will  ultimately  find  their 
necessary  institutional  and  environmental  embodiments.  Jewish 
history  is  a  testimonial  to  the  strength  of  will  and  purpose  against 
accident  and  circumstance.1  In  the  face  of  every  great  ideal  project 
for  the  betterment  of  human  life,  when  the  chorus  of  diplomatists, 
business  men  and  priests  of  the  established  order  cries,  "Impractical," 
it  continues  with  prophetic  insight  to  give  the  answer — "If  you  will  it, 
this  is  no  fairy  tale."2 

This  belief  in  the  idea  is  synthesized  with  the  recognition  of  the 
place  that  environmental  circumstance  has  in  life  in  the  movement  of 
Zionism.  Never  have  the  Jews  as  a  people  separated  their  hope 
for  an  ideal  life  from  this  world  to  the  same  extent  as  the  Christian 
peoples  have  done.  Even  in  moments  of  despair  when  tears  and 
prayers  were  the  only  possible  means,  the  ideal  itself  was  associated 
with  the  land  of  Israel.  Throughout  the  Exile  they  still  continued 

'Of  course,  Jewish  history  is  also  a  testimony  to  the  barrenness  of  wish  and  hope 
without  proper  consideration  of  political  and  physical  means. 

2Herzl  s  famous  phrase  in  reference  to  the  Restoration  of  Zion.  See  Norman  Angell, 
in  Menorah  Journal,  January,  1917. 


140  THEORIES   OF  AMERICANIZATION 


to  study  the  pK3  nvibn  rniVtD  (i.e.,  Commandments  depending  upon 
Israel's  tenure  of  Palestine)  against  the  time  when  Israel  would  be 
restored  to  Zion.  Even  when  hunger  and  oppression  conjured  up 
other-worldly  visions,  the  Messianic  hope  did  not  become  altogether 
dissociated  from  its  terrestrial  basis.  Zionism  insisting  on  a  socially 
autonomous  background  guaranteed  by  the  world's  political  and  legal 
organization  brings  about  a  complete  rapprochement  between  the  two 
inseparable  factors  of  moral  progress,  a  humane  ideal  and  adequate 
political  conditions. 

VII 

THE  JEWISH  PEOPLE  —  AN  INTERNATION 

Just  as  Zionism  may  be  seen  as  a  synthesis  of  ideal  aspiration  and 
material  considerations,  so,  too,  it  may  be  regarded  as  aiming  for  a 
harmony  between  nationalism  and  internationalism.  In  the  Zionist 
ideal  the  majority  of  the  Jews  must  remain  outside  of  Palestine,  and 
the  Jewish  nation  is  conceived  of  as  an  international  community 
with  a  centre  in  Palestine.  In  the  various  lands  of  the  diaspora 
adjustment  to  the  political  and  social  conditions  of  the  land  will  be 
necessary.  Palestine  with  its  politically  and  socially  autonomous  life 
will  act  as  a  uniting  bond  between  the  various  communities.  On 
the  other  hand,  through  these  various  communities  the  influences 
of  the  whole  world  are  to  be  brought  to  bear  upon  the  development  of 
the  Palestinian  centre.  Unity  is  conceived  in  cultural,  not  political 
terms;  and  the  implications  of  nationhood  become  international. 
In  such  a  type  of  organization  the  desire  for  full  expression  of  national 
culture  becomes  compatible  with  the  conception  of  an  economic 
internationalism.  Truly  seen,  it  becomes  ultimately  dependent 
upon  internationalization  of  the  economic  basis  of  cultural  life. 
When  we  think  of  the  Jewish  loyalty,  we  must  bear  in  mind  that  the 
allegiance  is  not  to  a  land  exclusively,  but  to  an  International  Com- 
munity of  men  whose  interests  include  and  are  inextricably  woven 
with  the  interests  of  many  peoples  and  with  the  universal  spread  of 
liberal  thought.  One  who  is  loyal  to  the  Jewish  People  rightly  con- 
ceived must  become  loyal  to  all  the  families  on  the  earth  among  whom 
the  Jews  are  scattered. 


THE   VALUE   OF   ETHNIC   GROUPS  141 

To  this  natural  consequence  of  the  form  of  its  organization  must 
be  added  the  trend  of  its  own  thought.  The  Jewish  ideal  has  long 
ceased  to  identify  national  greatness  with  territorial  and  political 
expansion .  This  is  at  the  root  of  the  confusion  in  understanding  whether 
the  Jews  are  a  nation  or  a  religious  group.  In  form  of  organization 
they  resemble  a  social  community  most  like  a  nation.  In  aspiration 
they  resemble  the  church,  for  their  ideal  is  in  the  realm  of  the  spiritual. 
The  modern  concept  of  nationality  approaches  most  nearly  a  descrip- 
tion of  the  Jewish  group.  It  hopes  to  express  its  individuality  not 
in  the  exclusive  possession  of  larger  tracts  of  land  or  in  the  control 
of  economic  assets,  but  through  its  contributions  in  the  realm  of 
art,  philosophy,  religion.  Its  supremacy  is  hoped  for  in  terms  of 
service,  not  in  terms  of  acquisition.  The  Jewish  People  desires 
freedom  to  live  in  accordance  with  Torah,  believing  profoundly  that 
the  acceptance  of  the  sovereignty  of  Instruction  and  Law  is  full  of 
significance  for  the  rest  of  the  world. 

Ultimately,  as  they  think,  it  is  the  rule  of  Torah  that  can  bring 
peace  to  the  world. 

For  from  Zion  shall  go  forth  the  Torah, 
And  the  word  of  the  Lord  from  Jerusalem. 
And  they  shall  beat  their  swords  into  plowshares, 
And  their  spears  into  pruning  hooks. 

It  is  a  loyalty  to  an  international  community  with  an  aspiration  of 
service  to  the  world  that  the  Jewish  allegiance  requires.  The  con- 
secration to  the  task  of  creating  this  new  type  of  nationality  or  cul- 
tural internationality  is  a  bold  attempt  in  the  face  of  the  historic 
emphasis  upon  economic  nationalism.  It  implies  not  only  a  devotion 
to  the  special  task  of  the  Restoration  of  Zion,  but  also  a  whole- 
hearted support  to  those  political  tendencies  which  look  forward 
toward  the  organization  of  the  world  on  an  international  basis. 
For  to  the  Jew  every  war  is  a  civil  war,  and  every  national  loss  a  loss 
to  his  own  people.  It  is  a  sickly  humanitarianism,  a  romantic 
idealism  in  the  end  negative  and  destructive,  which  sees  severance 
from  the  Jewish  people  as  emancipation  from  exclusiveness.  A 
realistic  sound-hearted  and  clear-headed  insight  would  understand 


142  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

that  to  break  with  the  Jewish  group  means  to  destroy  international 
ties  and  an  international  vision. 

To  be  born  a  Jew  is  an  accident  and  signifies  in  itself  nothing; 
but  it  may  signify  much,  if  the  ideal  implications  of  the  fact  are 
pursued  and  understood — if  History  is  synthesized  with  Nature. 
It  is  an  opportunity,  just  as  to  be  born  is  an  opportunity,  to  enter 
into  an  ideal  life.  To  him  who  has  the  mind  to  grasp  and  the  heart 
to  be  loyal  it  presents  an  added  possibility  of  living  the  Life  of  Reason. 

Those  who  oppose  a  dual  cultural  allegiance  are  consistent  if  they 
hold  that  a  highly  charged  nationalistic  spirit  is  the  necessity  of  the 
age  and  if  they  exalt  patriotism  in  the  exclusive  sense  to  the  position 
of  the  highest  virtue.  But  they  cannot  oppose  it  on  the  grounds  that 
it  is  narrowing.  Its  tendency  is  to  broaden  the  vision,  make  more 
conscious  the  loyalty,  and  raise  the  national  aspiration  to  service 
of  international  ideals. 

Once  we  look  upon  American  nationality  in  terms  of  human  service 
rather  than  selfish  acquisition  and  agree  that  America's  development 
of  an  international  conscience  is  a  good  thing,  then  we  cannot  assume 
a  laissez-faire  attitude  toward  the  question  of  the  perpetuation  of 
cultural  divergences  within  the  United  States.  The  line  of  argument 
previous  to  this  chapter  at  most  defended  the  right  of  the  sub-groups 
to  maintain  their  cultural  individuality.  It  did  not  propose  that  the 
State  of  its  own  initiative  should  further  retention  of  ethnic  loyalties. 
If,  however,  the  analysis  of  this  chapter  carries  conviction,  it  would 
be  necessary  to  go  a  step  further  and  say  that  it  is  the  duty  of  the 
State  to  lend  its  aid  and  encouragement  to  the  ethnic  groups  in  their 
desire  to  maintain  their  spiritual  heritage.  What  is  the  benefit  if 
one  tribalism  is  exchanged  for  another  tribalism — if  the  exclusive 
Jew  becomes  the  intolerant  American?  But  if  the  necessity  of  ad- 
justment can  lead  to  an  international  and  moral  outlook,  then, 
indeed,  can  we  say  that  we  have  advanced  a  whole  stage  in  the 
development  toward  humanism  which  is  the  essence  of  Democracy. 


PART  II 

V  THE  RELATION  OF  ETHNIC  AND  RELIGIOUS 

SCHOOLS  TO  THE  STATE 

VI  THE  CENTRAL   JEWISH    INSTITUTE 


THE  RELATION  OF  ETHNIC  AND  RELIGIOUS  SCHOOLS 
TO  THE  STATE 


CHAPTER  V 

THE  RELATION  OF  ETHNIC  AND  RELIGIOUS  SCHOOLS 

TO  THE  STATE 

I 

SECT  AND  ETHNOS 

The  educational  process  alone  is  the  instrumentality  properly 
responsible  in  a  democracy  for  maintaining  the  national  identity  of 
minority  communities.  Neither  local  segregation  nor  governmental 
separatism  would  allow  the  undisturbed  interchange  of  social  forces 
which  democracy  demands.  On  the  other  hand  communal  organiza- 
tion with  the  school  as  the  centre  would  make  it  possible  to  continue 
the  ethnic  loyalty  and  to  preserve  the  cultural  and  spiritual  person- 
ality of  the  group  without  of  necessity  interfering  with  the  free  play 
of  currents  demanded  by  the  unity  of  American  life. 

The  democratic  ends  which  we  are  seeking  would  be  defeated, 
however,  if  after  agreeing  to  such  a  formal  conclusion  we  should 
introduce  a  system  of  schools  not  in  accord  with  democratic  notions. 
Unless  a  principle  manifests  itself  in  concrete  institutions,  it  really 
does  not  exist  and  formal  adherence  to  it  becomes  meaningless. 
It  will  be  necessary  to  know  what  is  meant  by  the  term  'school'  in 
the  plan  of  adjustment  outlined.  The  remaining  two  chapters  will 
accordingly  be  devoted  to  an  analysis  of  the  type  of  ethnic  educational 
institution  conceived  to  be  proper  for  the  school  system  of  the  minority 
group.  The  first  and  most  important  problem  that  will  engage  our 
attention  is  the  question  of  the  relation  of  the  educational  system  of 
the  ethnic  group  to  the  school  system  of  the  state. 

Here  we  find  evidence  of  the  close  connection  between  ethnic 
and  religious  groups  to  which  we  have  already  had  reference  in  our 
second  chapter.  In  truth,  it  is  artificial  to  treat  the  problems  of 
religious  and  of  ethnic  education  separately.  The  distinction  be- 
tween the  two  types  of  groups  is  far  from  being  absolute  and  the 
process  of  abstraction  which  differentiates  the  one  from  the  other 

147 


148  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

serves  to  over-emphasize  the  differences  and  to  obscure  the  similari- 
ties. As  is  indicated  by  the  frequent  insistence  on  the  use  of  the 
national  tongue,  the  parochial  school  has  developed  in  many  cases 
because  it  served  to  perpetuate  primarily  national  distinctions.1  In 
fact,  it  is  rather  the  truth  that  the  main  strength  of  parochial  schools 
lay,  at  least  in  earlier  times,  in  the  circumstance  that  through  them 
the  foreign  groups  could  preserve  their  nationality  so  closely  bound  up 
with  their  religion.  On  the  other  hand,  when  nationality  is  conceived 
in  its  cultural  rather  than  political  sense,  the  problem  comes  very 
close  to  what  is  considered  generally  a  religious  problem. 

Especially  in  dealing  with  the  relationship  of  the  Jewish  community 
to  the  State  would  it  be  futile  to  separate  the  ethnic  from  the  religious 
problem.  Neither  the  term  'ethnic  group'  nor  the  term  'religious 
group'  taken  alone  is  either  exact  or  adequate  in  describing  the  nature 
of  the  Jewish  group,  nor  would  the  two  used  together  serve  to  cover 
the  case.  The  terms  obtained  by  translating  these  words  into  Hebrew 
could  not  be  naturally  used  in  Hebrew  to  describe  the  Jewish  group. 
"Am  Yisroel,"  the  People  of  Israel,  and  "Kenesseth  Yisroel,"  the 
Community  of  Israel,  are  the  Hebrew  phrases.  While  in  the  one  case 
there  is  more  of  a  national  ring  and  in  the  other  more  of  a  religious 
connotation,  the  terms  are  not  so  sharply  marked  off  and  defined. 
To  treat  our  people  as  simply  ethnic  or  religious  would  veer  the 
discussion  into  those  conventional  artificialities  and  false  emphases 
which  should  be  avoided  and  amount  to  a  partial  if  not  total  begging 
of  the  question.  Furthermore,  by  dealing  with  the  two  types  of 
groups  together,  we  may  make  explicit  what  is  most  important  for 
our  discussion.  We  are  dealing  with  minority  communities  bound  by 
common  tradition.  The  fundamental  matter  to  be  borne  in  mind  is 
that  communities  of  men  are  involved.  By  treating  the  problem  as 
one  of  'religious  education'  a  connotation  of  Bible  Study  and  Cate- 
chism is  conjured  up,  and  the  halo  of  literary  and  spiritual  study  is 
cast  about  what  is  in  reality  a  question  of  the  perpetuation  of  an 
association  of  men.  On  the  other  hand,  the  discussion  of  the  'na- 
tional group'  immediately  rouses  an  apprehension  of  the  intrusion 
of  a  foreign  government,  when  only  the  question  of  an  association  of 

1George  V.  Wenner,  "Lutheran  Parochial  School,"  Religious  Education,  April,  1916. 


ETHNIC   AND   RELIGIOUS   SCHOOLS   AND   THE   STATE  149 

men  for  cultural  and  idealistic  purposes  is  involved.  The  matter 
which  really  concerns  us  is  not  the  correctness  of  a  dogma  or  the  valid- 
ity of  a  double  political  allegiance,  but  the  perpetuation  of  a  com- 
munity existing  for  the  pursuit  of  what  they  believe  to  be  idealistic 
and  cultural  ends. 

In  both  church  and  ethnic  society  the  community  is  bound  together 
primarily  because  of  common  traditions,  customs  and  beliefs.  The 
unity  is  what  would  be  termed  a  spiritual  one.  Physical  forces  may 
have  played  upon  the  group  in  the  past  to  make  it  a  group  and 
to  create  the  common  cultural  heritage;  and  some  measure  of 
physical  contiguity  is  necessary  to-day  to  make  the  community  in 
psychic  bonds  possible.  But  it  is  an  ideational  product,  the  result 
of  having  lived  together,  summed  up  in  the  term  'religion'  in  the  one 
case,  and  in  the  term  'culture'  in  the  other,  which  has  now  become  the 
most  important  factor  in  maintaining  the  identity  of  the  community. 
Left  to  the  play  of  the  present  merely  environmental  forces  it  would 
disintegrate.  The  unity  of  the  group,  whether  it  be  ethnic  or 
religious,  is  dependent  upon  its  ability  to  remember  its  socially  ac- 
quired characteristics,  upon  the  memory  of  its  history  and  culture, 
upon  the  process  of  education. 

The  ideas,  customs  and  ceremonies  to-day  known  as  religious  are 
really  the  cultural  expressions  of  definite  communities  of  men  now 
crystallized  into  dogma,  codes,  and  ritual.  What  we  call  religion 
was,  in  the  period  when  it  was  created,  very  much  what  we  should 
call  national  culture  to-day:  the  striving  of  a  particular  social  group 
to  transcend  the  limits  of  its  own  body  of  experience,  and 
pursue  ends  humane,  universal  and  eternal.  Thus  Judaism,  Hellen- 
ism and  Taoism  are  as  much  national  cultures  as  they  are  religion. 
It  is  rather  a  difference  of  Zeitgeist  which  makes  the  social  aspiration 
of  former  ages  express  itself  in  the  mystic  terms  of  God  and  Salvation, 
and  that  of  modern  nations  in  the  worship  of  Progress  and  Happiness. 
The  differences  are  less  real  than  external,  more  of  logic  and  sociology 
than  of  psychological  instinct  and  of  human  aspiration.  Catholicism 
cannot  be  rightly  understood  except  in  terms  of  the  spiritual  expres- 
sion of  Southern  Europe,  just  as  Protestantism  is  an  aspect  of  the 


150  THEORIES   OF  AMERICANIZATION 

North  European  national  strivings.  When  these  social  expressions 
become  transplanted  into  an  environment  which  does  not  provide 
the  proper  social  milieu,  they  become  formalized  and  tend  to  assume 
the  character  of  a  body  of  principles  or  doctrines  very  often  unrelated 
to  life.  Then  we  are  sure  that  they  are  'religion'.  But  in  reality,  if 
a  religion  is  to  remain  vital,  it  must  have  its  own  social  background. 
So,  too,  a  people  transplanted  must  give  up  its  government  incidental 
to  its  primary  and  intrinsic  character  as  a  community  of  social  beings, 
and  it  then  tends  to  identify  its  life  with  certain  principles  for  which  it 
stands.  But  as  in  the  case  of  the  religious  heritage,  the  principles 
must  remain  meaningless  without  a  social  background.  What  is 
significant  is  that  in  both  cases  a  spiritual  product  of  a  former  social 
life  now  becomes  the  raison  d'etre  of  continuing  the  society. 

The  discussion,  then,  relates  to  such  groups  as  the  ethnic  and 
religious,  which  as  their  distinguishing  characteristics  possess  idea- 
tional  (religious  or  cultural)  heritages  developed  under  other  than  the 
present  geographical  and  natural  conditions.  As  a  matter  of  fact 
the  whole  question  has,  in  the  past,  generally  been  thought  of  in 
religious  terms  even  when  an  ethnic  problem  was  involved.  So  that 
criticism  of  any  existing  mode  of  adjustment  would  be  mainly  a 
criticism  of  the  religious  school. 

It  can  hardly  be  said  that  we  have  reached  a  satisfactory  solution 
in  the  present  adjustment.  Although  the  country  as  a  whole  has 
accepted  the  state  schools,  the  Catholics  have  never  consented  to 
the  present  arrangement  and  protest  against  being  forced  to  support 
schools  to  which  they  do  not  send  their  children.  On  the  other 
hand,  many  look  askance  at  the  very  existence  of  parochial  schools 
and  urge  their  total  suppression  by  the  State,  as  has  been  done  in 
France.  In  addition,  several  new  conditions  warrant  a  fresh  dis- 
cussion of  the  question.  To  the  problem  of  religious  minorities  has 
been  added  our  own  problem  of  ethnic  minorities,  made  crucial  by 
the  large  immigration  since  1881  of  nationalities  somewhat  further 
removed  from  the  Anglo-Saxon  American  stocks  than  were  the  races 
brought  by  earliest  tides  of  immigration,  and  emphasized  also  by  the 
concurrent  development  of  the  idea  of  cultural  nationality.  Especi- 
ally is  this  important  since  such  a  large  proportion  of  the  recent 


ETHNIC   AND    RELIGIOUS   SCHOOLS   AND   THE   STATE  151 

immigrants  are  Jews  to  whom  religious  and  national  identity  are  quite 
indistinguishable,  for  their  nationality  is  religious  and  their  religion 
national.  The  Jewish  group  is  undoubtedly  an  important  factor  in 
bringing  to  the  fore  the  question  of  religious  and  ethnic  education.1 

In  the  second  place,  an  awakened  interest  in  religious  matters  seems 
to  be  astir.  A  rationalistic  and  scientific  impatience  with  the  fantas- 
tic methods  of  religion,  prayer,  ceremonialism  and  dogmatism  has 
obscured  somewhat  the  ends  which  religion  sought  to  attain,  ends 
which  had  to  do  with  enlarging  the  human  vision,  with  the  setting  up 
of  ideals  of  service,  with  great  humane  purposes.  A  new  psychology 
of  religion  is  giving  back  to  religion  some  place  in  the  economy  of 
human  life,  though  this  place  and  its  proportion  may  be  greatly 
changed.  Furthermore,  the  emphasis  that  has  in  recent  years  been 
placed  upon  the  social  nature  of  religion  is  leading  to  the  realization 
that  the  present  mechanical  methods  in  religious  schools  are  wholly 
inadequate  for  the  development  of  a  religious  consciousness. 

The  recent  excitement,  especially  on  the  part  of  Protestants2  and 
Jewish  reform  ministers,3  hailing  the  Gary  scheme  as  a  solution  for 
the  problem  of  correlation  of  religious  and  public  education,  is  indica- 
tive of  the  tacit  dissatisfaction  with  the  present  situation.  The 
interest  of  Protestant  bodies  in  the  development  of  week-day  religious 
instruction  is  evidence  of  the  growing  disapproval  of  the  formality  of 
the  Sunday  school.  Among  the  Jews  a  wide  experiment  in  religious 
education  is  being  carried  on.  The  scheme  ranges  from  methods  of 
extension  education  through  celebration  of  festivals,  club  work  and 
literature,  to  the  intensive  work  of  the  parochial  schools.  Though 
the  Jews  on  the  whole  do  not  favor  parochial  schools  (over  99  per 
cent  send  their  children  to  the  public  schools)  the  parochial  school 
movement  has  recently  received  some  impetus  in  the  general  increase 
of  interest  in  religious  education  and  in  dissatisfaction  with  the 

*It  is  interesting  to  note  that  of  all  immigrant  groups  the  Jews  have  been  the  leaders 
in  active  Americanization  work  and  even  anticipated  the  public  schools  in  reckoning 
with  the  problem  (as  in  the  Educational  Alliance).  The  term  'Melting  Pot'  is  the 
creation  of  a  Jewish  writer,  and  the  'Federation  of  Nationalities'  theory  has  been 
developed  by  a  Jewish  thinker. 

^Religious  Education,  February,  1916. 

3System  of  Religious  Education  in  Secular  Schools,  Year  Book  of  the  Central  Conference 
of  American  Rabbis,  1916. 


152  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

present  situation.  The  variety  of  schools  includes  also  those  which 
are  purely  secular  in  character  or  nearly  so  and  which  present  the 
antithesis  to  the  denationalized  'purely  religious'  Sunday  school. 
Most  interesting  in  this  connection  is  the  recent  action  of  the '  Arbeiter 
Ring'  in  introducing  Yiddish  and  Hebrew  into  their  schools.  This 
strong,  radical  organization,  consisting  of  over  100,000  Jewish  work- 
ingmen,  with  their  own  organ,  Die  Arbeiter-Stimme,  until  now  has 
conducted  Sunday  schools  for  the  spread  of  socialist  ideas,  and  con- 
sistently opposed  giving  their  children  any  Jewish  instruction,  relig- 
ious or  national.  In  addition,  the  discussion  in  many  circles  of  the 
possibility  of  having  Yiddish  and  Hebrew  introduced  into  the  public 
school  as  culture  languages  is  indicative  of  the  unsatisfied  need  felt 
for  the  retention  of  foreign  ethnic  cultures.  This  newly  awakened 
interest,  giving  rise  to  variety  of  ideas  and  types  of  solution,  makes 
especially  imperative  a  careful  consideration  of  the  fundamental 
principles  involved. 

There  are  three  modes  of  organization  possible:  (1)  The  paro- 
chial school,  which  displaces  the  public  school.  (2)  The  inclusion  of 
particularistic  teaching  in  the  curriculum  of  the  public  school. 
(3)  A  system  of  schools  conducted  by  the  group  and  complementary 
to  public  school  instruction.  Which  of  these  three  general  schemes 
satisfies  in  the  greatest  degree  the  needs  of  the  ethnic  group  and  at 
the  same  time  is  harmonious  with  the  criteria  of  democracy  which  we 
have  in  mind? 

n 

THE  PAROCHIAL  SCHOOL 

The  first  question,  that  of  the  Parochial  School,  has  received  the 
most  complete  development  among  the  Catholics,  and  for  this  reason 
our  discussion  will  deal  especially  with  the  position  maintained  in  this 
denomination.1  The  Catholics  have  (1)  consistently  maintained  that 

'The  following  three  books  will  be  found  valuable  as  indicating  the  attitude  toward 
religious  education  by  the  three  denominations,  Catholic,  Protestant,  and  Jew:  C.  S. 
C.  Burns,  The  Condition  of  Catholic  Education  in  the  United  States  (also  other  works 
by  the  same  author);  A.  S.  Athearn,  Religious  Education  and  American  Democracy; 
A.  M.  Dushkin,  Jewish  Education  in  New  York  City. 


ETHNIC   AND   RELIGIOUS   SCHOOLS   AND   THE   STATE  153 

the  state  schools  do  not  serve  their  needs  and  that  only  the  parochial 
school  is  adequate  and  (2)  generally  held  that  parents  who  send 
their  children  to  parochial  schools  should  be  exempted  from  taxation 
for  the  support  of  public  schools.  Their  arguments  may  be  summed 
up  as  follows: 

The  Rights  Argument.1  To  the  parents  belongs  the  'right'  by 
nature  and  by  divine  authority  to  choose  freely  under  what  system 
the  child  shall  be  educated.  The  state,  interfering  with  this  right, 
either  by  suppressing  parochial  schools  or  by  putting  an  additional 
burden  upon  those  parents  who  send  their  children  to  the  parochial 
schools,  or  by  the  unjust  competition  of  providing  free  schools,  is 
transgressing  its  own  function,  which  is  to  regulate  competition, 
not  itself  to  compete;  to  protect  the  rights  of  individuals,  not  to 
interfere  with  them;  and  to  step  in  when  the  parent  fails  to  do  his 
duty,  not  to  abrogate  the  parental  duties.  The  education  given  by 
the  state  inculcates  ideas  inconsistent  with  the  beliefs  of  the  parent 
and  thus  makes  a  breach  between  the  child  and  the  parent.  Especi- 
ally when  a  parent  believes  that  the  inculcation  of  his  doctrine  is 
necessary  for  securing  the  eternal  life  of  the  child  does  it  appear 
heinous  to  compel  the  child  to  attend  state  schools;  for  the  state 
will  in  such  a  case  be  robbing  the  child  of  his  eternal  life,  a  tyranny 
worse  than  arbitrarily  convicting  him  to  death. 

The  Pedagogical  Argument.2  (a)  Religion  is  as  large  as  the  whole 
of  life.  It  does  not  consist  merely  of  the  memorization  of  creed  or 
the  mechanical  performance  of  ceremonies.  It  must  pervade  all 
action  and  all  thought.  Therefore,  the  whole  education  of  the  child 
must  be  permeated  by  its  influence,  the  methods  of  teaching  must 
exemplify  the  religious  outlook.  The  religious  principles  must  be 

JPierre  Binaut,  Les  droits  el  les  devoirs  de  I'etat  en  matiere  d'enseignment.  Monsignor 
P.  R.  McDevitt,  "The  State  and  Education,"  Bulletin  of  the  Catholic  Education  Atiocia- 
tion,  February,  1916.  John  F.  Fenelon,  in  The  State  Catholic  Education  Association 
Bulletin,  November,  1916.  Rev.  T.  Bouquillon,  Education,  to  Whom  does  it  Belong? 
1892.  Rev.  R.  I.  Holland,  The  Parent  First,  1892.  Rev.  S.  G.  Conway,  The  State 
Last,  1892. 

2Pierre  Binaut,  Les  droits  et  les  devoirs  de  /'  etat  en  matiere  d'enseignment.  C.  S.  C. 
Burns,  The  Conditions  of  Catholic  Education  in  the  United  States,  1917  (and  other  works 
by  the  same  author).  Shields,  T.  E.,  "Relation  Between  Catholic  School  Systems 
and  the  State,"  Catholic  Education  Bulletin,  November,  1916. 


154  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

made  manifest  in  every  detail  of  the  life  of  the  school  if  they  are  to 
become  active  and  significant. 

(6)  The  public  schools  cannot  maintain  a  neutral  attitude.  Even 
refraining  from  religious  instruction  is  an  attitude.  The  relative 
emphasis  on  subjects  and  the  interpretation  of  them  develop  an  atti- 
tude in  the  pupil's  mind,  a  point  of  view  quite  comparable  with  a 
religious  point  of  view.  The  teacher,  too,  having  a  mind,  cannot  be 
neutral  and,  even  when  he  avoids  favoring  any  one  of  the  conflicting 
sects  openly,  his  work  and  influence  are  bound  to  be  unconsciously 
colored  by  his  religious  attitude.  The  monopoly  of  education  held 
by  the  state  thus  leads  to  indoctrination  of  the  state's  point  of  view. 

(c)  The  public  school  cannot  teach  religion.  The  parochial  school 
can  teach  citizenship.  Therefore,  since  education  can  be  complete 
only  if  it  is  a  unitary  process,  the  parochial  school  should  be  favored. 

The  argument  advanced  concerning  the  conflicting  rights  of  parent 
and  state  would  be  more  convincing  in  the  light  of  laissez-faire 
politics.  In  this  system  of  thought  the  state  comes  in  to  restrain 
one  individual,  who  appears  as  a  complete  entity  with  definite  and 
fixed  rights,  when  he  interferes  with  the  equally  definite  and  fixed 
rights  of  another  individual;  or  to  judge  between  them  when  two 
individuals  disagree;  or  to  fulfill  the  duties  of  the  individual  when 
he  neglects  to  perform  them.  In  such  a  theory,  with  its  weighing 
of  right  against  right,  the  presupposition  must  be  that  rights  are 
stable  and  unchangeable;  else  how  could  they  be  measured?  In 
the  particular  application  to  the  right  to  educate,  in  accordance  with 
the  argument,  it  is  nature  and  authority  that  have  standardized 
values. 

All  that  one  can  mean,  however,  by  maintaining  that  nature  gives 
the  right,  is  that  because  by  original  nature  the  parent  tends  in  a 
variety  of  ways  to  take  care  of  its  offspring  the  parent  should  be 
the  one  to  decide  what  the  education  of  the  child  should  be  under  the 
conditions  of  civilized  society.  But  origin  alone  cannot  be  considered 
as  a  sanction.  All  civilized  society  exists  because  original  nature  does 
not  satisfy  the  conditions  of  humane  living;  original  nature  must  be 
modified  so  as  to  permit  the  harmony  of  a  rational  life.  The  antith- 
esis 'natural-artificial'  obscures  the  truth  that  the  latter  develop- 


ETHNIC   AND   RELIGIOUS   SCHOOLS   AND   THE   STATE  155 

ment  also  becomes  natural.  The  true  antithesis  would  be  original 
and  subsequent  nature.1 

Sanction  in  a  democratic  conception  comes  from  serviceableness. 
Authority  and  origin  are  sanctions  only  in  so  far  as  they  give  a  hint 
of  usefulness  for  the  present  situation.  One  has  a  right  to  follow  a 
certain  course,  when  after  consideration  of  as  many  as  possible 
relevant  elements  it  seems  to  be  the  right  course  to  take.  The  ques- 
tion of  relevancy  involves  immediately  our  basic  democratic  principle. 
In  the  whole  argument  the  contestants  appear  to  be  the  parent 
and  the  state,  while  the  individual  mostly  concerned,  the  child  to  be 
educated,  is  left  altogether  out  of  consideration.  Perhaps  the 
profoundest  element  in  democracy  is  the  consideration  that  it  urges 
must  be  given  to  the  matter  involved,  especially  if  it  be  a  person.2 
The  object  most  closely  affected  must  be  the  centre  from  which 
radiate  all  considerations  and  all  reckonings.  Even  when  they 
reach  far  out  from  the  immediate  individual  to  more  distant  relation- 
ships, they  must  never  lose  this  primarily  important  orientation. 

But,  as  already  implied,  the  whole  conception  of  the  relation  of  the 
individual  to  society  involved  in  these  arguments  is  itself  faulty. 
The  implication  is  that  the  individuals  in  society  are  fairly  complete 
and  separate  entities;  that  they  interfere  with  each  other  only  on 
occasion;  and  that  these  interferences,  when  they  do  occur,  are  always 
overt,  so  that  the  state  may  take  cognizance  and  step  in.  The  truth  is 
that  individuals  living  together  in  society  are  never  such  independent 
entities.  They  are  always  interfering  with  each  other,  always  helping 
or  hindering,  always  influencing  each  other,  actually  and  potentially. 
As  long  as  men  are  in  communication,  they  are  already  reacting  one 
to  another,  interference  being  far  more  subtle  than  the  laissez-faire 
theories  would  imply.  Even  the  laissez-faire  principle  that  the  state 
comes  in  when  individuals  interfere  with  one  another,  would  make 
the  state's  function  continuous  and  not  spasmodic,  were  the  true 
nature  of  the  richness  of  relationship  of  individual  to  society  fully 
realized.  Not  each  individual  with  his  separate  rights  is  the  reality. 


^horndike,  Educational  Psychology,  Vol.  I,  page  293;    Santayana,  Life  of  Reason, 
Vol.  I,  page  276;  Dewey,  Democracy  and  Education,  Chapter  IV,  page  331. 
*See  Chapter  I. 


156  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

Such  an  individual  is  an  abstraction;  but  the  very  living  process  of 
interaction  in  which  the  'individual'  and  'society'  are  abstract  terms 
is  what  actually  exists.  The  state,  therefore,  is  a  function  of  the  inter- 
dependence of  human  beings  in  communication,  not  a  means  for 
maintaining  independence  in  an  exclusive  and  separatist  sense. 

The  state's  function  to  educate  is  a  positive  one.  It  does  not  rise 
from  the  need  to  step  in  at  times  in  loco  parentis.  Education  exists 
to  make  explicit  the  significances  of  communication,  to  maintain  inter- 
dependence, and  to  preserve  its  results  in  culture,  in  the  arts  and  in  the 
spiritual  life.1  It  arises  not  because  men  are  independent  of  each 
other — the  words  interdependence  and  communication  are  but  pale 
shadows  of  the  complexity  and  dynamic  quality  of  the  relation  of  men 
to  men — but  because  they  are  completely  interdependent. 

Those  living  under  one  state  affect  each  other,  and  a  common 
educational  system  serves  in  the  measure  that  it  is  efficient  to  further 
the  benefits  of  the  community  it  represents  and  to  preserve  and  make 
more  fruitful  this  interdependence.  Such  an  educational  system  must 
in  a  democratic  community  reckon  with,  represent  and  express  the 
variety  of  forces  in  the  community  and  must  be  conducted  by  the 
community  as  a  whole,  not  by  any  part  of  it.  A  failure  on  the  part 
of  the  state  to  reckon  with  the  groups  it  deals  with  or  a  failure  on  the 
part  of  one  group  to  recognize  the  interdependence  of  all  the  groups 
in  the  state  is  alike  undemocratic.  In  so  far  as  the  common  schools  do 
not  represent  the  broad  interests  of  the  country  as  a  whole  they  may 
be  objectionable;  but  they  cannot  be  opposed  on  the  ground  that 
they  do  not  represent  the  interests  of  one  group.  For  the  very 
function  of  the  educational  system  of  the  state  rises  from  the  fact 
that  all  within  the  state  are  in  communication;  they  are  members 
of  one  community. 

The  notion  of  right  involved  in  the  first  argument  harks  back  to  a 
conception  of  politics  untenable  to-day  and  violates  the  fundamental 

'The  idea  that  education  is  a  function  of  men  in  communication  (both  in  the  temporal 
and  social  sense),  that  it  is  a  necessity  of  community  (see  how  Mac  Iver  uses  this 
word  in  his  work  "Community")  seems  to  be  fundamental  and  rich  in  possible  impli- 
cations. Bouquillon,  a  Catholic  writer,  in  a  pamphlet  entitled  "Education,  to  Whom 
does  it  Belong?"  foreshadowed  this  idea  in  the  answer,  "to  every  association."  A 
more  direct  treatment  is  to  be  found  in  Dewey,  Democracy  and  Education,  Chap.  I 
and  II 


ETHNIC   AND   RELIGIOUS   SCHOOLS   AND   THE   STATE  157 

principles  of  democratic  thought.  It  rests  upon  authority  for  its  sanc- 
tion. It  conceives  of  the  problem  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  parent 
and  the  church  and  not  from  that  of  the  child  who  is  most  intimately 
concerned.  It  fails  to  reckon  in  full  measure  with  the  responsibilities 
implied  in  the  actual  multiplicity  of  dependences  upon  which  the 
nature  and  the  good  of  the  individual  rest.  This  legalistic  argument, 
which  we  have  captioned  the  'rights  argument,'  was  the  vogue  in 
the  parochial  school  controversies  of  the  '90s,  and  is  still  used  by  some 
French  writers  of  to-day.  Among  the  present  American  defenders 
of  the  parochial  school  it  has  been  superseded  by  the  more  utilitarian 
'pedagogical  argument.' 

Pedagogical  science  will  agree  with  the  contention  that  the  inculca- 
tion of  formal  principles  is  ineffective  and  that  if  these  are  to  become 
active  forces  in  living  activities  the  reactions  desired  must  be  taught 
through  actual  situations.  The  atmosphere  of  the  school  and  the 
example  of  the  teacher  in  the  daily  life  of  the  child  are  more  potent 
than  the  precepts  of  a  few  hours  a  week.  Especially  in  such  a  matter 
as  religion  which  one  could  argue  is  a  "completion,  unification  and 
organization  of  all  life's  experiences,"1  must  the  influence  pervade 
all  action. 

If  the  community  in  which  the  child  lives  were  to  consist  only  of 
Catholics  such  a  contention  would  be  correct  in  its  practical  conclusion 
as  it  is  in  its  assumption  of  the  pedagogical  fact.  But  the  point  is 
just  this,  that  the  child  who  is  to  live  in  a  community  with  non- 
Catholics  ought  to  have  his  education  in  connection  with  a  repre- 
sentative community;  otherwise  what  guarantee  is  there  that  the 
reactions  will  function  in  the  wider  community?  To  teach  faith, 
hope  and  charity  towards  Catholics  in  a  Catholic  environment  does 
not  insure  practicing  these  virtues  toward  non-Catholics.  Christian 
charity  has  often  meant  charity  to  Christians  and  intolerance  of  others. 
The  argument  that  religion  must  be  connected  with  life,  then,  in 
reality  is  an  argument  against  the  parochial  school,  for  the  life  which 
the  American  must  live  is  wider  than  the  parochial  school. 

Further,  it  is  possible  to  understand  when  religion  is  defined  as  a 
completion,  unification  and  organization  of  one's  experience  why 

JCoe,  The  Psychology  of  Religion,  Chap.  VI. 


158  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

one's  religion  should  pervade  one's  whole  life.  But  that  is  quite  a 
different  thing  from  saying  that  one's  church  should  pervade  one's 
whole  life.  For  the  church  is  only  one  source  of  that  religious  experi- 
ence which  is  described  in  the  psychological  definition  of  the  term.1 
The  church  may  embody  in  its  history,  creed  and  ceremonies  the 
religious  experiences  of  some  group  or  some  individual;  but  each 
man's  religion,  if  he  has  any,  is  one  individual  experience  and,  if  it  is 
true  and  applicable  to  all  his  life,  must  be  derived  from  all  of  his 
life,  not  alone  from  limited  associations.  Though  the  teachings  of  a 
great  church  with  a  long  history  be  taken  as  valuable  or  even  inval- 
uable guides  in  life  and  though  they  have  in  a  sense  a  relatively  eternal 
and  universal  value,  the  democratic  conception  would  never  admit 
that  truth  has  ever  been  completed  or  that  it  is  anything  but  relative 
to  the  situation  in  which  one  is  now  placed.  Not  only  must  the 
religion  be  applied  to  a  life  which  is  most  justly  representative  of  the 
situation  (and  not  to  any  parochial  community),  but  the  religion,  too, 
which  is  to  be  applied  to  life,  must  itself  be  an  expression  and  repre- 
sentation of  the  broader  life.  To  assume  the  absoluteness,  infallibil- 
ity and  completeness  of  the  teachings  of  any  church  is  itself  contrary 
to  the  democratic  notions  that  life's  truths  learned  from  life's  experi- 
ences are  subject  to  referendum  and  recall  by  life's  experiences.  The 
actual  conditions,  natural  and  social,  under  which  the  members  of 
a  modern  democratic  community,  which  is  radically  and  religiously 
heterogeneous,  live  would  make  the  pedagogical  argument  specious. 
The  public  schools  are  really  more  representative  of  the  activities  and 
ideals  of  the  community  in  which  the  citizens  must  live  than  is  the 
parochial  school. 

To  the  second  charge  of  the  pedagogical  argument  that  the 
public  schools  cannot  maintain  an  attitude  of  neutrality  and  that 
their  teaching  is  disruptive  of  the  church  and  parental  authority, 
the  public  schools  must  plead  guilty.  They  are  certainly  develop- 
ing habits  of  reaction  to  situations.  They  are  certainly  building 
up  the  minds  of  the  pupils.  To  deny  this  would  be  equal  to 
saying  that  they  were  having  no  effect  upon  their  pupils.  But 
this  is  just  what  they  should  do.  As  long  as  the  community  con- 

1Royce>  Sources  of  Religious  Inflight. 


ETHNIC   AND   RELIGIOUS   SCHOOLS   AND   THE   STATE  159 

tains  a  variety  of  forces,  all  of  these  must  be  permitted  to  play 
upon  the  child.  Otherwise  the  child  is  subjected  to  a  process  which 
amounts  to  indoctrination;  his  horizon  would  be  limited  by  a  pre- 
arranged and  delimited  and  delimiting  education,  that  is,  by  an 
education  parochial  in  outlook  as  it  is  in  name.  An  opposite  danger 
is  pointed  out  in  the  disintegrating  influence  of  conflicting  teaching 
which  leads  to  many  a  tragedy  in  the  disruption  of  the  family.  But 
if  this  conflict  is  really  representative  of  an  actual  and  current  conflict 
between  the  church  and  the  state,  is  it  not  necessary  for  the  child 
to  go  through  it? 

The  harshness  of  the  conflict,  in  a  sense  unavoidable,  could  never- 
theless be  mitigated  if  the  state  schools,  in  democratic  fashion,  took 
into  consideration  the  social  life  of  their  pupils  and  adjusted  them- 
selves in  some  measure  to  it.  On  the  other  hand,  the  forces  represent- 
ing the  family  community  must  also  be  modified.  It  is  the  stand-pat 
and  therefore  undemocratic  attitude  of  both  institutions  which  is  the 
cause  of  the  deplorable  rending  of  social  ties.  Whatever  scheme  of 
education  is  finally  favored  must  face  frankly  this  important  problem 
of  maintaining  the  integrity  of  family  life  central  to  social  stability 
and  to  the  nation's  welfare. 

The  foregoing  discussion  based  on  the  Catholic  position  applies 
in  the  main  also  to  the  Jewish  situation.  But  the  organization  and 
theory  of  the  Jewish  parochial  school  present  important  differences 
which  affect  the  emphasis  of  the  argument.  In  the  first  place  the 
parochial  school  is  the  exceptional  thing  among  the  Jews,  not  the 
typical  educational  institution.  As  noted  above,  only  a  fraction  of 
one  per  cent  of  the  Jewish  children  attend  parochial  schools.  From 
a  practical  point  of  view,  therefore,  the  Jewish  parochial  school 
presents  no  crucial  problem.  Furthermore,  the  Jewish  parochial 
schools  are  subject  to  lay  control.  They  are  communal,  not  clerical 
institutions,  each  managed  by  a  separate  board  of  trustees  just  as  any 
hospital  or  recreational  center  might  be.  The  teachers  and  principal 
generally  are  laymen,  not  rabbis;  and  the  secular  subjects  are  taught 
by  teachers  who  have  been  trained  in  the  public  school  system  and 
have  had  experience  in  teaching  in  the  public  schools. 


160  THEORIES    OF   AMERICANIZATION 

The  Jewish  schools  differ  from  the  Catholic  schools  in  theory  as  well 
as  in  organization.  The  latter  are  apprehensive  of  a  heretical 
doctrine  and  aim  to  safeguard  their  pupils  from  disrupting  external 
influences.  The  Jewish  defense  rests  on  the  following  two  conten- 
tions: (1)  That  the  amount  of  time  taken  by  the  public  school  leaves 
no  room  for  an  adequate  Jewish  education.  (2)  That  the  teaching 
of  the  secular  and  the  Jewish  subjects  under  one  roof  by  teachers  who 
understand  both  Jewish  and  American  life  will  avoid  the  conflict 
between  "ultra  oriental  Judaism  and  ultra  occidental  Americanism" 
and  the  resulting  tragedy  of  the  disintegragion  of  homes.1 

These  differences  of  organization  and  underlying  principles  no 
doubt  lessen  the  danger  of  divergence  from  the  general  ideas  of  the 
community.  On  the  other  hand,  it  should  be  realized  that  the 
differences  between  the  Catholic  and  Jewish  argument  are  not  quite 
so  wide  as  they  may  appear  from  the  bald  statement.  Since  the  Jews 
have  no  centralized  church  and  recognize  no  clerical  authority,  these 
schools  could  not  be  under  other  but  lay  control.  The  utilization  of 
public  school  teachers  for  instruction  in  secular  subjects  is  a  makeshift 
made  necessary  by  inability  to  procure  any  other  type  of  teacher 
qualified  to  teach  the  secular  branches.  As  a  matter  of  fact  a  high 
school  and  a  Talmudical  academy  are  being  developed  at  present  with 
the  aim  of  producing  teachers  who  can  teach  both  the  secular  and 
Hebrew  subjects.  The  modern  spirit,  though  not  excommunicated, 
is  rather  tolerated  than  welcomed.  Science,  music,  drawing,  etc., 
are  just  permitted  to  enter  and  the  pupils  do  not  receive  adequate 
instruction  in  these  studies.  Vocational  subjects  and  the  manual 
arts  are  neglected.  An  obscurantist  spirit  prevails.  Until  recently 
books  in  modern  Hebrew  were  taboo  and  to  read  them  was  considered 
sacrilege.  Even  to-day  the  teachers  are  troubled  and  are  at  a  loss 
to  know  what  to  do  when  a  youngster  puts  the  time-worn  question 
concerning  the  validity  of  the  Biblical  or  the  scientific  account  of 
creation.  Whatever  is  modern  and  scientific  enters  only  perforce. 

The  main  difficulty,  however,  lies  in  the  fact  that  the  Jewish  paro- 
chial school,  like  the  Catholic  system,  segregates  the  children  along 

»S.  T.  H.  Hurwitz,  "The  Jewish  Parochial  School"  The  Jewiak  Teacher,  December, 
1917. 


ETHNIC   AND   RELIGIOUS   SCHOOLS   AND   THE   STATE  161 

lines  of  creed.  The  essential  point  of  having  the  various  elements  of 
the  population,  during  the  formative  period  of  childhood,  associate 
with  their  neighbors  with  whom  they  are  destined  to  live  together  as 
American  citizens  remains  unfulfilled.  No  teaching  of  the  common 
branches  in  the  classroom  can  take  the  place  of  actual  personal 
commingling  as  an  educational  force.  Bound  as  these  children  are  to 
come  in  contact  with  each  other  and  to  work  together  in  later  life, 
their  separation  from  each  other  in  school  days  is  poor  preparation 
for  the  cooperation  and  tolerance  essential  to  a  democracy.  Though 
the  perpetuation  of  significant  elements  of  the  culture  of  ethnic 
groups  is  permissible  under,  and  really  a  purpose  of  democracy, 
segregation  along  any  lines  of  either  creed  or  race  is  thoroughly 
undemocratic. 

This  main  objection  stands,  also,  against  those  who  favor  parochial 
schools  upon  a  cultural,  not  a  religious  basis.  The  proponents  of  the 
'Federation  of  Nationalities'  theory,  which  was  discussed  in  the  pre- 
ceding chapter,  imply  separate  ethnic  schools.  Among  these  are  to 
be  reckoned  also  the  Yiddish-Nationalists  who  favor  the  perpetua- 
tion of  Jewish  life  through  the  means  of  Yiddish  culture.  This 
group  conducts  a  number  of  complementary  week-day  schools  at 
present,  but  looks  forward  to  a  separate  school  system  supplanting 
the  public  schools.  No  argument  of  clericalism  or  obscurantism  can 
be  levelled  against  the  Yiddish-Nationalists.  It  must  be  admitted 
that  their  standpoint  is  modern  and  that  they  base  their  contention 
on  modern  sociological  conceptions.  Though  intense  nationalists, 
their  idea  of  nationality  is  in  accord  with  the  most  enlightened  cul- 
tural notions  regarding  the  nation  as  existing  by  the  sanction  of  its 
will  to  service  in  the  development  of  literature,  art  and  the  ideal 
life,  not  by  the  right  of  the  will  to  power. 

These  protagonists  of  the  separate  ethnic  schools  point  out  that  the 
environment,  the  street,  the  press,  politics,  the  vocation,  the  theatre, 
literature  and  art  will  of  necessity  impress  upon  the  individual  living 
here  the  culture  of  the  land.  No  one  can  avoid  learning  the  language 
and  culture  of  the  country  even  if  he  should  endeavor  to  do  so.  It 
is  the  foreign  ethnic  culture  having  no  natural  or  social  background 
which  is  in  danger  of  being  lost  and  which  can  be  saved  only  through 


162  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

the  greatest  effort.  With  the  hypothesis  that  the  nature  of  the  indi- 
vidual is  determined  mainly  by  his  ancestral  endowment,  which  is  the 
basic  underlying  conception  of  these  thinkers,  it  is  only  through 
the  preservation  of  the  ethnic  culture  that  the  individual  can  attain 
his  full  and  free  self-development  and  contribute  his  best  to  the 
nation  as  a  whole.  Welcoming  rather  than  apprehending  segregation 
along  ethnic  lines,  because  they  believe  all  culture  and  the  higher 
life  to  be  the  fulfillment  of  ethnic  strivings,  they  do  not  fear  the  pos- 
sible disruptive  influence  of  ethnic  segregation,  maintaining  that  the 
geographic,  economic  and  political  unities  will  enforce  cooperation 
and  mutual  toleration.  Furthermore,  the  unique  ethnic  contribution 
enriching  the  life  of  the  nation  is  of  such  great  value  that  it  will  more 
than  justify  the  organization  along  ethnic  lines. 

Sufficient  has  been  said  in  the  previous  chapter  to  show  that  the 
general  tendency  of  the  evidence  is  against  the  assumption  that  race 
in  the  ethnic  sense  is  the  paramount  force  in  the  life  of  the  individual. 
To  create  an  institution  which  would  tend  to  divide  the  country  along 
the  lines  of  assumed  racial  distinctions  would  be  to  perpetuate  in  an 
artificial  manner  differences  which  may  have  no  natural  basis  in 
heredity.  Such  a  process  would  fall  under  the  category  of  those 
artificial  social  arrangements  which  protect  an  artificial  assumption 
rather  than  liberate  inherent  capacities.  In  the  end  it  would  amount, 
as  far  as  most  individuals  are  concerned,  to  a  process  of  indoctrination 
and  to  an  undue  exaltation  of  the  place  of  the  ethnic  culture.  It  is  an 
essential  American  doctrine  that  citizenship,  not  lineage,  makes  one 
heir  to  the  culture  of  America. 

There  is  another  very  important,  perhaps  obvious  though  elusive 
element  involved  in  the  situation  revolving  about  the  question  of 
allegiance.  The  reference  is  not  to  the  external  matters  of  political 
and  civic  allegiance.  No  one  can  seriously  question  the  loyalty  of 
those  who  have  received  a  parochial  education.  There  is  no  evidence 
which  goes  to  show  that  the  graduates  of  parochial  schools  fall  short 
of  the  duties  and  responsibilities  involved  in  citizenship.  The  attempt 
to  cast  doubt  of  loyalty  in  these  matters  succeeds  only  in  obscuring 
the  real  issue.  It  is  a  psychological  aloofness  rather  than  a  political 
defection  which  is  to  be  apprehended;  a  type  of  disloyalty,  if  that 


ETHNIC   AND   RELIGIOUS   SCHOOLS   AND   THE   STATE  163 

is  not  too  strong  a  word,  which  will  affect  possible  contribution 
rather  than  reveal  itself  in  overt  wrongdoing. 

The  school  system  of  a  nation  exists  ultimately  for  ideal  purposes; 
to  clarify  its  vision,  to  reveal  its  soul,  to  sanctify  the  sons  of  the  people 
for  the  pursuit  of  the  ideal  things  inherent  in  the  life  of  the  nation. 
If  the  school  is  conducted  by  the  ethnic  group  and  the  child  is  taught 
by  teachers  representative  of  the  group  culture,  while  the  American 
ideal  is  either  picked  up  casually  or  interpreted  by  foreign  teachers, 
it  will  be  natural  for  the  allegiance  of  the  pupils,  in  the  sense  of  a 
spiritual  devotion,  to  be  given  rather  to  the  ethnic  group.  For  it  is 
in  the  ethnic  school  that  the  pupil  will  find  the  clear  consciousness  of 
an  ideal  and  the  finest  personalities.  He  may  still  fulfill  all  the  legal 
obligations  and  sincerely  pledge  his  allegiance  to  the  flag  of  his 
country;  but  his  moral  wholehearted  devotion  will  tend  to  be  in- 
spired toward  the  promotion  of  the  ethnic  culture.  A  separate 
school  system  for  the  ethnic  group  may  involve  a  loss  of  positive 
spiritual  allegiance  to  the  society  represented  by  the  geographic 
community. 

The  parochial  school  neither  in  its  Catholic,  Jewish  nor  national 
form  would  seem  to  fulfill  the  demands  of  the  democratic  idea  that 
the  school  system  must  be  representative  of  the  community  at  large; 
that  to  organize  it  along  the  lines  of  one  sect  or  ethnos  would  tend  to 
segregation  and  indoctrination.  Should  all  children,  then,  be  com- 
pelled to  attend  public  schools,  since  these  further  the  public  good, 
and,  as  is  done  in  France,  all  parochial  education  suppressed?  Indeed, 
if  those  who  send  their  children  to  parochial  schools  would  avow  their 
indifference  to  the  public  weal  such  a  procedure  might  seem  justifiable. 
But,  in  reality,  the  supporters  of  the  parochial  schools  insist  that  it  is 
the  welfare  of  society  which  they  have  at  heart.  They,  therefore, 
appear  as  a  minority  diverging  from  the  opinion  of  the  majority. 

Here  may  be  utilized  the  principle  formulated  in  our  first  chapter 
with  reference  to  the  suppression  of  minority  opinion  and  activities. 
The  idea  set  forth  there  is  that  objective  demonstration  of  the  evil 
of  an  activity  is  necessary  before  it  may  forcibly  be  suppressed. 
Objectivity  of  proof  of  evil  is  the  sanction  of  suppression.  In  the 
degree  that  in  any  case  objectivity  of  proof  is  possible  and  care  is 


164  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

taken  to  determine  actual  evil  results,  in  that  degree  can  it  be  said 
that  democracy  prevails  in  any  situation. 

Now  it  would  be  difficult  to  prove  that  the  graduates  of  parochial 
schools  are  appreciably  inferior  to  other  pupils  or  that  parochial 
schools  are  a  menace  to  the  social  order.  If  it  does  happen  that  cer- 
tain schools  do  not  measure  up  to  the  objectively  accepted  standard 
in  certain  particulars,  whether  it  be  in  instruction  in  English  or  in 
scientific  subjects,  the  state  may  demand  improvement  in  these 
subjects.  But  beyond  that  the  state  may  not  go.  It  dare  not 
suppress  institutions  which  do  not  obviously  endanger  the  public 
welfare.  If  the  opinion  offered  above,  that  parochial  education  is 
not  proper  in  a  democracy,  has  a  rational  basis,  it  must  ultimately 
have  its  effect  without  resorting  to  force.  There  is  nothing  so  disinte- 
grating to  an  unjust  established  system  as  an  opposing  idea  founded  on 
change  of  social  conditions.  When  the  danger  is  crucial,  it  may  not 
be  practical  or  possible  to  wait  for  the  slow-working  influence  of 
theoretical  discussion.  But  when  the  menace  is  not  immediate  or 
obvious,  nothing  can  be  said  against  such  a  policy.  No  social  or 
educational  institution  is  so  perfectly  sealed  that  it  can  prevent  the 
forces  of  the  environment  from  ultimately  disintegrating  it,  if  it 
does  not  come  to  serve  real  human  needs. 

The  strength  of  the  parochial  school  in  all  likelihood  indicates 
that  it  satisfies  a  justifiable  demand  not  provided  for  by  the  public 
school  system.  No  doubt  much  of  its  strength  is  artificial — upheld 
by  the  threat  of  clerical  punishment  or  by  the  public  opinion  of  the 
social  group.  But  it  is  highly  questionable  whether  it  could  maintain 
itself  if  it  did  not  have  something  to  contribute.  For  one  thing, 
the  parochial  schools  stand  as  a  protest  against  the  exclusion  of  all 
religious  teaching  from  our  scheme  of  education,  which  implies  a 
monopoly  of  the  right  to  educate  on  the  part  of  the  state.  If  a  monop- 
oly of  education  by  the  church  is  no  solution,  neither  is  a  monopoly 
on  the  part  of  the  state  equitable.  It  may  be  shown  that  the  state 
really  cannot  have  a  monopoly  of  education,  for  general  social  contact 
and  literature  are  permeating  educational  influences.  But  the  same 
can  be  said  also  in  reference  to  the  parochial  school,  the  term  monopoly 
being  used  relatively  and  particularly  of  the  school  system.  It  may 


ETHNIC   AND   RELIGIOUS   SCHOOLS   AND   THE   STATE  165 

be  argued  that  the  state  in  a  democracy  like  ours  is  more  likely  to 
be  democratic  and  that  its  schools  are  more  representative  of  the 
common  interests  of  the  country  as  a  whole,  that  its  ideas  of  education 
are  more  responsive  to  the  demands  that  the  life  of  the  environment 
makes  upon  us  than  a  system  bound  by  a  historical  and  parochial 
tradition.  If  we  must  choose,  it  is  said,  let  us  choose  the  more 
democratic  monopoly  and  the  danger  of  indoctrination  will  be 
mitigated.  But  that  a  great  danger  does  lurk  in  indoctrination  by 
the  state  cannot  be  gainsaid.  The  state  is  still  mainly  an  economic 
organization,  though  it  no  doubt  has  its  cultural  and  spiritual  aspect. 
Its  strength,  however,  has  come  because  it  has  given  adequate  empha- 
sis to  the  physical  and  economic  bases  of  life  and  has  recognized  the 
supreme  superiority  of  machinery  as  against  magic  in  the  accomplish- 
ment of  ends.  This  emphasis,  however,  has  had  its  counterpart  in  a 
materialism  which,  fixing  its  attention  upon  economic  and  political 
factors,  has  exalted  these  into  ends.  Professor  Dewey  quotes  some- 
one as  saying  that  as  a  result  of  modern  economic  and  political 
organization  one  sinner  can  with  a  machine  make  more  bricks  in  one 
hour  than  a  saint  could  previously  make  in  a  whole  day  with  his 
hands.  But  one  might  retort  that  that  is  just  the  trouble,  and  we 
wonder  what  the  sinner  is  going  to  do  with  the  bricks.  The  education 
of  the  parochial  school  may  present  obstacles  to  a  perfect  harmoniza- 
tion of  the  heterogeneous  elements  within  the  state.  It  may  even  be 
quite  ineffective,  filling  the  mind  with  other-worldly  visions  and  with 
the  fantastic  methods  of  sacrifice  and  prayer  dubious  in  their  potency 
for  actually  reconstructing  the  world.  But  the  indoctrination  by  the 
state  may  lead  to  attention  upon  economic  and  physical  forces 
which  taken  together  with  an  anti-social  point  of  view  may  be  disas- 
trous. 

Undoubtedly  the  presence  of  the  parochial  school  is  an  indication 
of  the  unsatisfactory  state  of  adjustment  between  public  and  other 
education.  To  solve  our  problem  it  will  not  be  sufficient  to  suppress 
the  parochial  schools,  which  are  the  results  of  a  maladjustment  and 
not  the  root  of  the  evil.  It  will  be  necessary  to  provide  for  the  ele- 
ment in  the  demand  which  the  parochial  school  comes  to  serve  that 
has  a  rational  support.  That  done,  the  better  cause  is  bound  to  win 


166  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

in  an  environment  where  the  interchange  of  social  forces  is  as  sure  as 
it  is  in  this  country. 

On  the  other  hand,  those  who  claim  that  the  state  ought  to  contrib- 
ute to  the  support  of  parochial  schools  cannot  receive  justification 
in  accordance  with  the  foregoing  analysis,  that  education  is  a  function 
of  the  state  community,  not  alone  a  parental  duty.  The  taxation 
which  supports  the  public  schools  is  not  a  sort  of  charge  (as  a  private 
firm  might  make)  to  the  members  of  the  state  for  services  rendered 
to  these  particular  members.  It  is  a  means  of  supporting  an  institu- 
tion which  safeguards  that  ideational  community  which  is  the 
necessity  of  and  ultimately  the  most  significant  thing  in  the  govern- 
mental unity.  The  wealth  of  individual  citizens  is  possible  only 
because  the  community  provides  the  conditions  and  protects  the 
rights  necessary  for  its  acquisition.  Wealth  is  really  communal 
in  its  nature  and  even  when  entrusted  to  the  'care'  of  individuals 
a  part  of  it  must  go  back  to  support  the  institutions  which 
make  wealth  possible  and  give  it  significance.  The  parent  is 
taxed  not  because  he  is  a  parent,  but  because  he  is  a  citizen,  as  is 
evidenced  by  the  fact  that  all  citizens  whether  they  have  children  of 
school  age  or  not  are  taxed  in  equal  measure.  The  parent  who  sends 
his  children  to  a  parochial  school  has  no  more  right  to  a  rebate  than 
has  a  bachelor.  Citizenship  and  not  parenthood  is  what  involves 
the  responsibility  of  maintaining  schools.  Minorities  who  differ 
from  the  public  view  can  maintain  their  individuality  only  at  a  greater 
cost.  Society  penalizes  divergences  whose  good  is  not  recognized, 
whether  these  ultimately  benefit  the  public  welfare  or  not.  Every 
minority,  even  when  its  objects  are  social,  must  fight  its  way  to  recog- 
nition and  support.  When  an  activity  is  directed  mainly  to  preserve 
the  interests  of  one  group,  even  when  these  interests  are  thoroughly 
compatible  with  the  interests  of  all  other  groups,  and  in  the  long  run 
even  contribute  to  the  general  social  welfare,  it  is  that  group  alone 
which  must  support  the  particular  institution.  Perhaps  the  best  way 
to  ameliorate  this  condition,  unjust  from  an  ideal  point  of  view, 
though  under  present  conditions  perhaps  the  only  feasible  one,  would 
be  to  take  from  the  religious  communities  the  financial  burden  of 
the  charities,  such  as  hospitals  and  recreation  centers,  which  are  in 


ETHNIC   AND   RELIGIOUS   SCHOOLS   AND  THE   STATE  167 

reality  public,  not  parochial  questions,  and  permit  the  funds  usually 
expended  on  these  tasks  to  flow  to  the  causes  which  the  minority 
community  can  alone  rightly  further,  i.e.,  the  preservation  of  the  ideas 
and  life  of  the  religious  group  and  the  ethnic  community. 

Ill 

RELIGIOUS  EDUCATION  IN  THE  STATE  ScnooLs1 

The  second  suggestion,  to  introduce  religious  and  ethnic  instruction 
in  the  state  schools,  follows  the  plan  which  has  been  adopted  in  some 
of  the  European  countries  and  in  Australia.  On  the  theory  that  the 
State  has  taken  over  the  parents'  function  to  educate,  it  is  held  that 
the  state  schools  must  do  all  that  the  parents  would  have  done 
had  the  education  of  their  children  remained  under  their  control. 
In  accordance  with  our  own  analysis,  however,  which  makes  the 
state's  function  rise  out  of  the  necessity  of  maintaining  and  furthering 
the  society  which  the  state  government  represents,  it  becomes  clear 
that  particularistic  teachings  have  no  place  in  the  curriculum  of  the 
state's  schools.  The  function  of  the  state's  system  is  to  be  interested 
in  whatever  is  common  to  all  citizens  by  reason  of  their  living  together. 
A  movement  in  line  with  democracy  would  eliminate  whatever 
vestiges  of  religious  teaching  are  still  retained  in  the  public  schools, 
like  the  reading  of  the  Bible  and  the  celebration  of  religious  holidays. 
The  division  of  our  pupils  within  the  school  into  groups  for  the  study 
of  particular  doctrines  or  ethnic  heritages  presents  enormous  practical 
difficulties  from  the  administrative  point  of  view.  In  order  to  have 
proper  grading,  religious  or  ethnic  schools  in  any  neighborhood  have 
to  draw  their  pupils  from  many  public  schools,  for  the  total  school 
population  is  divided  into  a  variety  of  sects.  And  second,  not  all  par- 
ents are  desirous  of  giving  their  children  religious  instruction.  But 
more  important  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  treatment  of  the  subject 
in  this  chapter  is  that  such  a  separation  of  pupils  within  the  school 
savors  of  the  spirit  of  segregation  so  antithetical  to  democracy. 

'A.  Riley  and  others,  The  Religious  Question  in  Public  Education;  M.  E.  Sadler, 
Moral  Instruction  and  Training  in  Schools,  2  vol.;  G.  Spiller,  Moral  Education  in 
Eighteen  Countries. 


168  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

Particularistic  teaching  which  aims  to  preserve  the  society  of  some 
one  group  of  the  population  is  a  function  of  the  society  which  is  to  be 
preserved.  It  is  not  a  function  of  the  state. 

The  objections  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  religious  and  ethnic 
schools  are  even  more  forcible.  Wherever  religious  teaching  in  public 
schools  has  been  in  vogue,  it  has  assumed  a  formal  nature.  It  is 
bound  to  be  so,  for  religion  and  ethnic  culture  are  not  abstract  ideas 
that  can  be  put  into  phrases  and  memorized,  as  seems  to  be  the  notion 
prevailing  among  many.  All  that  the  Catholics  say  concerning  the 
need  of  atmosphere  and  of  the  example  of  personalities,  of  oppor- 
tunity for  application  in  every  possible  phase  of  school  life,  is  here 
very  much  to  the  point.  Only  when  a  religion  has  lost  its  vitality 
and  no  longer  has  a  message  to  bring  will  memorization  of  phrases 
be  regarded  as  religious  teaching.  When  an  ethnic  culture  is  involved, 
the  task  is  even  more  complex;  another  language,  literature  and  his- 
tory must  be  taught.  The  effort  and  enthusiasm  needed  for  such 
a  work  is  beyond  what  state  schools  could  give.  The  perpetuation  of 
the  life  of  a  community  is  a  task  not  to  be  attained  through  incidental 
attention.  Religious  and  ethnic  teaching  is  never  mere  intellectual 
erudition.  There  is  involved  a  loyalty  directed  to  the  preservation 
of  a  social  group.  Special  schools  for  music  and  art  are  established, 
because  a  permeating  atmosphere  is  necessary.  A  social  attitude 
within  the  school  must  be  developed  to  inspire  a  devotion  to  the  pur- 
suit of  these  arts.  Even  more  is  it  necessary  to  have  separate  schools 
for  the  religious  and  ethnic  communities,  because  there  is  here  in- 
volved allegiance  to  a  society. 

Whenever  elements  in  the  heritage  of  a  religious  group  or  of  an 
ethnic  community  have  become  objects  of  universal  as  well  as  partic- 
ular interest,  nothing  can  be  said  against  the  introduction  of  such 
subjects  into  the  public  schools.  If  any  portions  of  ancient  Hebrew 
history  and  literature  are  regarded  as  important  in  the  development 
of  Western  civilization,  there  seems  to  be  no  valid  reason  why  these 
subjects  should  not  take  their  place  with  the  classic  languages  and 
Roman  and  Greek  history.  If  in  any  given  locality  Yiddish  or 
modern  Hebrew  is  deemed  important,  there  is  no  more  reason  for 
excluding*  these  than  there  is  for  eliminating  any  other  modern 


ETHNIC   AND   RELIGIOUS   SCHOOLS   AND   THE   STATE  169 

language.  This  can  be  maintained  only  with  the  proviso  that  the 
subject  be  taught  in  a  disinterested  manner,  not  as  a  'religious'  subject 
with  a  distinctive  halo  spread  about  it.  The  plan  introduced  in 
North  Dakota  and  Colorado,  of  giving  credit  for  Bible  study  outside 
of  the  classroom,  can  meet  with  no  objection,  for  the  idea  is  to  treat 
the  Bible  as  literature.1  But  such  schemes  should  not  be  looked  upon 
as  praiseworthy  steps  in  the  development  of  religious  education. 
So,  too,  there  seems  to  be  no  reasonable  argument  against  reading 
good  translations  of  ancient  Hebrew  writings  and  of  the  classics  of  the 
New  Testament  in  school  assemblies  alongside  of  selections  from  Plato, 
Shakespeare,  Walt  Whitman,  or  any  other  great  writer.  The  exclus- 
ive reading  of  the  Bible,  as  such,  in  the  authorized  and,  therefore,  not 
disinterested  version  is  reprehensible.  Those  who  argue  that  the 
Bible  should  be  read  because  it  is  great  literature  are  not  consistent 
when  they  demand  reading  it  exclusively. 

The  problem  of  religious  education  cannot  be  solved  through  such 
movements  as  the  Australian  plan,  the  North  Dakota  idea,  and  the 
introduction  of  Bible  reading  in  public  schools.  Both  Catholics 
and  Jews  who  really  desire  to  maintain  a  specific  form  of  culture 
and  ideal — and  those  among  the  Protestants  to  whom  Protestantism 
still  implies  some  elements  of  a  distinctly  Christian  tradition,  and  does 
not  merely  mean  a  halo  thrown  around  the  contemporaneous  national 
spirit, — do  not  find  such  literary  studies  adequate  for  maintaining 
the  continuity  of  the  community  whose  ideals  they  wish  to  preserve. 
What  these  communities  must  do  if  they  are  to  justify  their  existence 
is  to  enrich  the  personalities  of  the  communicants  and  through  them 
the  life  of  the  nation.  The  formal  teaching  of  religious  subjects  in 
the  public  schools  is  as  little  adequate  to  solve  our  problem  as  a  high 
school  study  of  Latin  or  Greek  is  potent  to  recreate  the  Roman  or 
Greek  societies  with  their  specific  types  of  personality.  If  the  ethnic 
and  religious  communities  remain  satisfied  with  such  instruction  they 
will  soon  be  as  dead  as  are  the  classic  peoples. 

»C.  A.  Wood,  School  and  College  Credit  for  Outside  Bible  Study.      W.  F.  Crafts,  Bible 
in  School  Plans  of  Many  Lands. 


170  THEORIES  OF   AMERICANIZATION 

IV 

COMPLEMENTARY  ETHNIC  AND  RELIGIOUS  SCHOOLS 

The  plan  that  seems  to  harmonize  best  with  the  principles  laid 
down  is  a  dual  system  providing  that  ethnic  and  religious  education 
be  given  in  special  schools.1  In  such  a  scheme  each  system  of  schools 
would  assure  the  integrity  of  the  community  which  supports  it;  the 
public  schools  would  further  the  society  of  the  state;  the  religious 
and  ethnic  schools,  the  society  of  minority  communities.  Neither 
group  is  conceived  of  as  having  a  monopoly  on  the  right  to  conduct  a 
school  system.  Our  first  principle  is  that  each  community  undertake 
the  responsibility  of  the  maintenance  of  its  own  culture. 

These  schools  must  be  correlated  with  each  other.  They  must 
reckon  with  each  other  and  adjust  themselves  to  each  other.  Other- 
wise one  school  might  interfere  with  the  work  of  the  other  to  such  a 
degree  as  to  make  the  right  to  conduct  a  school  empty.  This  prin- 
ciple of  correlation  fundamentally  affects  arrangements  of  schedule. 
More  fundamental,  in  order  to  prevent  a  breach  in  the  pupil's  life, 
not  only  external  matters  like  time  schedules  must  be  adjusted  with 
mutual  regard,  but  the  curriculum  and  general  spirit  in  each  school 
must  be  developed  with  cognizance  of  the  situation  in  the  other  schools. 
Whatever  schemes  are  developed  must  fulfill  at  least  these  two  basic 
principles,  separation  of  control  and  support  on  the  one  hand  and 
correlation  and  adjustment  on  the  other. 

The  validity  of  such  an  arrangement  between  the  public  schools 
and  other  educational  agencies  has  recently  received  recognition  in 
the  Gary  plan.  One  of  the  many  arguments  for  the  Gary  plan  was 
that  the  free  time  between  school  sessions  could  be  utilized  by 
churches  for  religious  education.  Unfortunately,  in  this  case,  while 
there  was  accord  in  principle,  the  actual  schedule  proposed  proved 
unsatisfactory  to  some  groups  and  really  would  have  interfered 
with  schemes  of  supplementary  education  already  existing  or  in 
process  of  development  to  a  far  greater  extent  than  it  would  have 
promoted  new  work.  A  number  of  Protestant  ministers  and 

'See  A.  M.  Dushkin,  Jewish  Education  in  New  York  City.  A.  S.  Athearn,  Religious 
Education  and  American  Democracy;  B.  S.  Winchester,  Religious  Education  and 
Democracy;  G.  V.  Wenner,  Religious  Education  and  the  Public  School*. 


ETHNIC   AND   RELIGIOUS   SCHOOLS   AND   THE   STATE  171 

Reform  Jewish  rabbis,  who  had  hitherto  contented  themselves  with 
remaining  unsatisfied  with  the  Sunday  School,  approved  the  plan, 
for,  naturally,  it  did  not  disturb  any  of  the  work  that  they  were  carry- 
ing on  and  offered  at  least  a  plan,  even  if  impracticable,  to  satisfy  their 
aspiration  for  better  work.  To  the  Catholics  the  issue  was  less 
important,  for  nothing  less  than  the  parochial  school  is  considered 
a  solution.  The  Jews  were  affected  most  because  they  are  already 
conducting  quite  an  extensive  educational  activity  supplementary 
to  the  public  school  system  after  school  hours.  Since  the  Gary 
schedule  kept  some  of  the  children  in  school  until  5  and  5:30  p.  m.,  it 
would  have  meant  the  complete  disorganization  of  these  activities. 
The  arrangement  of  free  hours  in  the  Gary  schedule  would  not  have 
permitted  reorganization  on  an  efficient  basis.  The  plans  being 
developed  by  Protestant  groups  for  week-day  religious  instruction 
would  also  have  been  seriously  hampered.  The  technical  difficulties 
of  this  scheme  of  correlation  cannot  concern  us  here.  What  is  neces- 
sary to  point  out,  however,  is  that  the  idea  of  correlation  becomes 
meaningless,  unless  we  see  how  it  affects  definite  plans.  The  Gary 
scheme,  heartily  endorsing  the  principle  of  correlation  and  mutual 
adjustment,  actually  would  have  greatly  handicapped  the  develop- 
ment of  supplementary  week-day  instruction  had  it  been  adopted 
in  New  York.1 

The  Sunday  School  offers  another  example  of  a  separate  system 
of  education  by  minority  groups.  This  is  the  agency  for  religious 
instruction  best  known  in  America  and  the  normal  one  for  the  Protest- 
ant groups.  Since  the  work  is  conducted  on  a  day  when  there  are 
no  public  school  sessions,  the  problem  of  the  adjustment  of  schedules 
is  eliminated.  Instead  of  this  one  problem,  however,  there  are  many 
others.  So  far  as  the  Jews  are  concerned,  it  is  altogether  inadequate 
as  a  solution,  and  its  introduction  as  a  means  of  Jewish  education 
has  on  the  whole  perhaps  done  more  harm  than  good.  Although  the 
Protestants  practically  have  no  other  schools  for  religious  education, 
there  is  complete  dissatisfaction  with  its  accomplishments.  For  the 
Catholics,  with  even  more  stringent  demands  for  religious  instruction, 

'Dushkin,  Jewish  Education  in  New  York  City,  p,  217,  Berkson  in  The  Jewish 
Teacher,  May,  1917. 


172  THEORIES    OF   AMERICANIZATION 

the  Sunday  School  is  out  of  the  question  as  a  solution.  There  are 
a  number  of  fundamental  objections.  The  time  given  is  insufficient; 
religious  teaching  becomes  disconnected  from  everyday  life;  since  it 
takes  but  two  hours  a  week,  teachers  cannot  be  expected  to  devote 
themselves  professionally  to  the  work  and  to  follow  a  course  of  study 
to  prepare  themselves  adequately.  From  the  point  of  view  of  pre- 
serving the  society  of  the  ethnic  group  the  Sunday  School  is  as  impo- 
tent as  the  plans  for  the  introduction  of  religious  education  into  the 
public  schools. 

The  problem  is  to  create  a  school  system  complementary  to  the 
public  schools,  correlated  with  them  and  yet  adequate  for  perpetuat- 
ing the  life  of  the  community  which  it  represents.  Both  in  time  sched- 
ules and  in  content  and  spirit  of  the  studies  the  two  parallel  systems 
must  adjust  with  mutual  consideration.  In  neighborhoods  where 
certain  ethnic  or  religious  minorities  predominate  the  teaching  staff 
in  the  public  schools  must  have  adequate  preparation  so  that  they 
may  understand  the  social  background  of  their  pupils.  Elements 
of  the  history  of  the  culture  and  of  the  arts  of  the  minority  group 
should  be  introduced  in  the  course  of  study.  Especially  in  the  case 
of  immigrant  groups  there  is  a  great  deal  that  the  public  schools 
can  do  to  get  closer  to  the  life  of  the  pupils.  This  phase  of  the  prob- 
lem of  adjustment  has  already  engaged  the  attention  of  American 
teachers  and  educators  and  is  undoubtedly  fraught  with  great 
possibilities.  On  the  other  hand  the  supplementary  schools  of  the 
ethnic  minorities  must  do  their  part  in  the  adjustment  to  the  schools 
of  the  state. 

The  Jews  have  been  carrying  on  such  supplementary  educational 
activities  as  are  proposed  here.  The  Talmud  Torahs,  to  which 
reference  has  already  been  made,  conduct  sessions  on  week-day 
afternoons  and  Sunday  (occasionally  also  on  Saturday).  Their 
function  is  to  transmit  the  Jewish  spiritual  heritage.  In  the  begin- 
ing  the  attempt  was  to  transplant  to  this  country  the  school  of  the 
Eastern  European  ghetto  and  to  crowd  in  as  many  hours  and  tradi- 
tional subjects  as  possible.  Gradually  the  need  of  adjusting  to  the 
new  conditions  has  impressed  itself  and  the  Talmud  Torah  is  taking 
on  the  aspect  of  a  community  centre  with  a  broad  educational  and 


ETHNIC   AND   RELIGIOUS   SCHOOLS   AND   THE   STATE  173 

recreational  program.  The  Central  Jewish  Institute  represents 
at  this  writing  the  furthest  development  in  the  attempt  to  work  out  a 
plan  in  which  the  two  elements,  preservation  of  the  ethnic  culture 
and  adjustment  to  America,  will  be  duly  considered.1  The  plan  of 
work  followed  in  this  institution  was  formulated  and  initiated  by  the 
writer  and  may,  therefore,  be  regarded  in  the  main  as  his  conception 
of  a  concrete  application  of  the  general  principles  presented.  Instead 
of  elaborating  a  theoretical  plan  of  supplementary  ethnic  education 
and  discussing  problems  likely  to  arise,  it  will  serve  our  purpose  best 
to  describe  the  activities  of  this  institution.  A  chapter,  therefore, 
has  been  added  dealing  with  the  work  of  the  Central  Jewish  Institute. 
More  detail  than  is  necessary  for  understanding  the  general  plan 
has  been  submitted.  A  careful  reader  although  he  might  agree 
broadly  with  the  foregoing  theoretical  analysis  might  yet  wonder 
what  it  would  mean  in  any  given  situation.  The  description  of  the 
activities  as  well  as  of  the  plan  of  the  Central  Jewish  Institute  should 
give  an  adequate  idea  of  what  is  considered  to  be  the  proper  educa- 
tional agency  in  our  democracy  for  preserving  the  culture  of  the  ethnic 
community  and  should  serve  as  a  sound  basis  for  judging  the  validity 
of  the  proposed  theory  of  adjustment. 

'For  a  general  account  of  Jewish  educational  efforts,  see  A.  M.  Dushkin,  Jewish 
Education  in  New  York  City. 


THE  CENTRAL  JEWISH  INSTITUTE 


CHAPTER  VI 
THE  CENTRAL  JEWISH  INSTITUTE1 


ITS  SIGNIFICANCE 

The  description  of  the  work  of  the  Central  Jewish  Institute  should 
prove  especially  instructive  in  our  study  of  the  problem  of  adjustment 
not  alone  because  it  gives  ample  consideration  to  the  two  factors  of 
our  problem  —  carrying  on  the  ethnic  tradition  and  adapting  to  the 
conditions  of  America  —  but  more  so  because  it  was  conceived  in  a 
clear  consciousness  of  this  double  task  which  faces  Jewish  life  in 
America.  Throughout  the  whole  plan  is  manifest  the  realization 
that  the  institution  is  to  work  under  American  conditions.  Never- 
theless, the  Hebrew  subtitle  mm  n>of>n  (Talmud  Torah)  aligns  it  defi- 
nitely with  the  educational  agency  whose  specific  purpose  is  the 
perpetuation  of  Jewish  life.  Its  comprehensive  plan  of  work  is  the 
culmination  of  two  lines  of  endeavor  in  Jewish  communal  activities. 

The  adaptive  tendency  is  best  illustrated  in  those  recreational  and 
educational  agencies  which  have  been  established  through  the  initia- 
tive of  the  Jews  who  came  here  in  the  earlier  wave  of  immigration 
between  1850-1870.  These  immigrants,  coming  mainly  from 
Germany,  have  been  eminently  successful  in  attaining  success  and 
position  in  American  life.  Very  early  they  turned  their  attention  to 

'Much  more  detail  has  been  included  in  this  chapter  than  is  necessary  for  illustrating 
the  foregoing  theoretical  analysis;  its  size  is  undoubtedly  disproportionate  to  its 
relation  to  the  rest  of  the  book.  After  consideration,  however,  I  have  decided  to  leave 
it  in  the  original  form,  hoping  that  the  description  of  plan  and  methods  will  help  to 
draw  a  concrete  picture  and  that  it  may  be  suggestive  to  others  who  are  interested  in 
the  development  of  the  Jewish  Community  Center. 

The  Central  Jewish  Institute  has  been  selected  because  it  comes  nearest  to  a  con- 
sistent application  of  the  ideas  elaborated  in  this  book.  Undoubtedly,  there  are  other 
Talmud  Torahs  and  Y.  M.  H.  A.'s  where  some  elements  of  the  work  are  carried  on  and 
in  some  instances  more  thoroughly  or  with  greater  success.  Some  of  the  Talmud 
Torahs  have  a  more  intensive  curriculum;  some  of  the  Y.  M.  H.  A.'s  give  a  greater 
place  to  recreational  activities.  But  HO  other  institution  could  have  served  as  an 
illustration  of  what  is  essential  in  the  plan,  the  adjustment  of  forces,  the  balance  of  work, 
the  organic  relationship  between  the  activities,  the  conscious  realization  of  the  problem. 

177 


178  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

the  organization  of  Jewish  charitable  institutions  and  they  have 
made  for  themselves  a  most  praiseworthy  record  by  the  generosity 
of  their  gifts,  the  orderliness  of  their  methods  and  the  administrative 
efficiency  of  their  leadership.  To-day,  though  a  minority  in  the 
community,  the  so-called  "German-Jews"  still  bear  the  financial 
burden  and  retain  the  ruling  power  in  Jewish  philanthropic  affairs. 
With  the  general  extension  of  public  interest  beyond  helping  the  poor, 
curing  the  sick  and  caring  for  the  orphan,  educational,  recreational 
and  'social'  activities  have  been  added  during  the  last  thirty  years. 
Into  this  new  work  the  older  philanthropic  notions  are  carried  over  and 
the  feeling  still  persists  that  the  beneficiaries  are  maladjusted  persons, 
abnormal  or  potentially  abnormal.  Thus  the  Educational  Alliance 
seeks  to  Americanize  the  immigrant  who  is  conceived  to  be  out  of 
harmony  with  the  general  civic  and  social  life.  The  Y.  M.  H.  A.V 
hope  that  their  recreational  activities  will  provide  a  prophylactic 
against  possible  vice.  The  social  activities  have  an  implication  of 
"doing  good"  for  the  people  in  the  slums.  Always  there  is  an  atti- 
tude on  the  part  of  the  directors  that  they  are  conducting  an  institu- 
tion for  others,  not  for  themselves,  to  serve  needs  which  they  them- 
selves or  their  children  do  not  feel.  Even  the  "religious  classes"  are 
conducted  for  the  purpose  of  giving  ethical  instruction  which  is  sup- 
posed, in  some  mysterious  way,  to  keep  the  children  of  the  poor  in 
the  straight  path  of  virtue.  Little  thought  is  exercised  upon  question- 
ing what  should  be  the  normal  to  which  the  individual  must  adjust 
his  life.  Some  current  conception  is  accepted  as  the  standard  and  the 
person  rather  is  regarded  as  the  misfit.  The  endeavor  is  to  adjust  the 
individual  to  prevailing  sociological  conditions.  In  a  word,  we  might 
say  that  these  institutions  endeavor  to  square  the  Jew  with  his  new 
geographical  environment  and  to  the  conditions  rising  out  of  it. 

The  other  factor,  stressing  the  retention  of  the  Jewish  consciousness, 
has  been  contributed  mainly  through  the  more  recent  immigration 
dating  from  1881,  consisting  largely  of  immigrants  from  Eastern 
Europe.  These  newcomers  are  still  in  the  throes  of  economic  adjust- 
ment. Nevertheless,  many  have  already  gained  a  foothold  among  the 
ranks  of  the  comfortably  situated  and  are  beginning  to  play  a  part  in 

1The  reference  is  to  the  Y.  M.  H.  A.'s  in  New  York  City. 


THE   CENTRAL  JEWISH    INSTITUTE  179 

Jewish  communal  work.  Together  with  the  more  Americanized  Jews 
of  the  earlier  wave  of  immigration  they  are  cooperating  in  the  endeav- 
or to  care  for  the  poor  and  sick  and  are  from  year  to  year  assuming  a 
larger  share  of  this  common  Jewish  responsibility.  Their  distinctive 
contribution,  however,  lies  in  their  interest  in  the  development  of  the 
Talmud  Torah  or  Communal  Jewish  School.  As  distinguished  from 
institutions  which  rose  from  the  need  of  meeting  the  new  conditions, 
the  Talmud  Torah  draws  its  purpose  from  within  Jewish  life.  Its 
purpose  is  to  transmit  the  Jewish  heritage  so  that  the  Jewish  com- 
munity consciousness  may  be  preserved  and  Jewish  spiritual  life 
perpetuated  in  the  new  land  for  the  coming  generations.  Its  work  is 
conceived  in  terms  of  education  for  the  normal  child,  not  as  a  method 
of  saving  individual  souls.  The  institutions  mentioned  above  have 
their  origin  fundamentally  in  the  new  geography;  the  Talmud  Torah, 
we  may  say,  finds  its  raison  d'etre  in  Jewish  history.  It  is  because  the 
Jews  have  a  past  crystallized  into  a  social,  cultural  and  spiritual 
heritage,  together  with  a  will  to  carry  it  on,  that  the  Talmud  Torah 
becomes  necessary. 

In  recent  years  both  types  of  institutions  have  tended  to  broaden 
the  scope  of  their  work.  On  the  one  hand,  the  Jewish  schools  have 
begun  to  realize  that  they  must  take  social  conditions  into  considera- 
tion if  they  are  to  be  successful  in  their  effort  to  preserve  Jewish  life  in 
this  country.  Unsanitary  and  dilapidated  buildings,  mechanical  and 
drill  methods  exercised  upon  equally  uninteresting  material,  unkempt 
and  untrained  teachers,  repel  the  child  born  and  bred  in  America, 
accustomed  to  a  highly  developed  and  systematized  public  school.  It 
is  being  realized,  furthermore,  that  the  education  of  girls  traditionally 
neglected  by  the  Jewish  school  can  no  longer  be  left  out  of  account. 
The  adolescent  boy  and  girl,  too,  present  a  most  harassing  problem, 
for  here  the  disintegration  of  Jewish  life  becomes  patent.  Even  the 
parent,  it  is  seen,  must  be  earnestly  considered  in  the  problem  of 
bridging  the  gap  between  the  old  and  the  new  generations.  In  answer 
to  these  problems  the  movement  among  the  Talmud  Torahs  in  recent 
years  has  been  to  include  social  and  recreational  activities  in  their 
scope  of  work.  On  the  other  hand,  some  of  the  social  settlements, 
beginning  to  understand  the  anomaly  of  being  Jewish  institutions 


180  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

with  no  characteristically  Jewish  work,  have  commenced  to  lay  more 
emphasis  on  what  they  call  their  "religious  classes,"  and  a  steady 
increase  in  attention  to  the  study  of  Hebrew  can  be  noted.  The 
tendency,  therefore,  in  both  institutions — though  the  approach  of  the 
one  is  from  Jewish  tradition  and  of  the  other  from  present  social 
conditions — is  toward  an  institution  which  will  harmoniously  fuse 
both  ideas  and  complete  the  synthesis  of  Jewish  history  and  American 
geography  with  all  that  these  two  facts  imply. 

The  older  institutions,  however,  are  laboring  under  very  difficult 
handicaps  in  their  endeavor  to  meet  the  new  demands  made  upon 
them.  In  the  original  plans  the  present  needs  were  not  taken  into 
consideration  and  the  attempts  at  improvement  are  impeded  by  the 
inadequate  facilities.  The  buildings  of  the  Talmud  Torahs,  seldom 
up  to  standard  even  for  classroom  work,  are  in  most  cases  totally 
unfit  for  the  variety  of  extra-curricular  activities  demanded  by  the 
new  conception.  On  the  other  hand,  the  social  settlements  are  often 
deficient  in  proper  accommodation  for  specifically  school  work.  Even 
more  important  than  the  almost  prohibitory  physical  difficulties 
inherent  in  the  buildings  is  the  mental  attitude  of  the  boards  govern- 
ing the  institutions.  Conditions  rather  than  a  changed  philosophy 
may  be  said  to  be  at  work  in  whatever  modifications  are  taking  place. 
In  neither  of  these  types  of  institutions  has  there  been  a  policy 
carefully  thought  out  with  reference  to  the  problem  involved.  Both 
have  been  imitative,  though  in  different  ways.  In  the  one  type  the 
prevailing  conceptions  and  methods  have  been  adopted  whole- 
heartedly, including  often  the  bad,  inadequate  and  irrelevant  ele- 
ments as  well  as  the  good.  Conformity  to  current  social  opinions 
and  institutions  has  marked  the  work.  In  the  development  of  the 
Talmud  Torah,  on  the  other  hand,  traditional  methods  are  the  main 
guides.  The  yoke  of  the  past  weighs  heavily  upon  every  detail  of 
method  and  curriculum  in  the  Talmud  Torah.  Change,  whether  in 
method  or  in  content,  tends  in  itself  to  be  regarded  with  suspicion. 

The  Central  Jewish  Institute,  erected  but  recently,  is  the  first 
institution  planned  at  its  very  inception  to  meet  the  problem  with  full 
cognizance  of  the  two  forces  shaping  Jewish  life.  Its  facilities  for 
classroom  and  school  work  are  unexcelled.  On  the  other  hand,  both 


THE   CENTRAL  JEWISH    INSTITUTE  181 

in  aesthetic  effect  and  in  facilities  for  the  variety  of  work  necessary  in  a 
social  centre  it  surpasses  the  older  settlements.  It  addresses  itself 
not  to  child  alone,  nor  to  any  one  age  of  the  population,  but  regards 
every  member  of  the  family  as  its  patron.  In  fact,  it  looks  upon  the 
family  as  a  whole,  rather  than  the  individual,  as  the  unit  of  its  work, 
regarding  the  family  as  the  keystone  of  the  Jewish  social  structure. 
It  is  a  Community  House,  endeavoring  to  serve  the  neighborhood  in 
every  way  it  can,  but  with  the  additional  and  specific  purpose  of 
perpetuating  for  the  community,  and  through  it  for  the  nation  as  a 
whole,  whatever  is  considered  of  significance  in  Jewish  cultural  and 
spiritual  life. 

What  makes  the  Central  Jewish  Institute  particularly  interesting 
to  us  is  its  conscious  attempt  to  contribute  to  the  large,  general 
problem  of  developing  an  educational  agency  that  will  be  potent  to 
preserve  a  vital  Jewish  life  under  conditions  prevailing  in  the  United 
States.  In  its  beginning,  however,  the  Institute  was  a  response  to  a 
local  need.  It  will  be  of  aid  in  understanding  what  is  of  permanent 
and  general  importance  and  what  is  merely  local,  what  has  entered  on 
principle  and  what  adventitiously,  if  we  briefly  examine  the  local 
conditions  from  which  the  Institute  came  into  being.  Incidentally 
we  may  also  gain  added  insight  into  the  problem  of  Americanization. 

II 

NEIGHBORHOOD  AND  HISTORY 

The  Central  Jewish  Institute  (125  East  85th  Street)  is  located  in 
Yorkville,  as  the  central  portion  of  Manhattan,  east  of  Fifth  Avenue, 
is  known.  As  differentiated  from  the  East  Side,  which  lies  to  the 
south,  and  Harlem  to  the  north,  this  neighborhood  presents  rather 
the  appearance  of  an  older  and  more  settled  population.  Still  pre- 
dominating in  foreign  elements, — either  of  first  or  second  generation — 
it  differs  from  these  other  two  sections  in  several  ways.  In  the  first 
place,  the  neighborhood  is  not  inhabited  exclusively  by  foreigners — 
quite  a  sprinkling  of  old  inhabitants  is  noticeable — and  a  far  greater 
number  of  the  inhabitants  are  the  American  children  of  foreign  born, 
or  foreign  born  who  came  here  in  the  '80's  and  90's.  In  addition,  the 


182  THEORIES   OP  AMERICANIZATION 

neighborhood  contains  an  unusually  large  percentage  of  Germans  and 
Irish,  giving  a  racial  distribution  reminiscent  of  the  'old'  immigration 
rather  than  of  the  'new.'  The  Jewish  population,  heterogeneous 
within  itself,  is  scattered  amongst  the  rest  of  the  population. 

Religiously  as  well  as  racially  an  unusual  heterogeneity  will  be 
found.  A  Catholic  parochial  school  flanks  the  synagogue  adjoining 
the  Central  Jewish  Institute  and  several  other  Catholic  institutions 
are  in  the  nearby  vicinity.  As  in  every  American  community,  the 
Protestant  churches,  nevertheless,  predominate.  From  the  point  of 
view  of  economic  classification,  wide  though  graded  divergences 
exist.  Lexington  Avenue  forms  a  dividing  line.  West  of  it  through 
Park,  Madison  and  Fifth  Avenues,  the  gradation  rises  from  middle 
class  to  ultra  rich.  This  division  of  Fifth  Avenue  represents  one  of 
the  wealthiest  sections  of  New  York.  East  of  Lexington  Avenue  the 
gradation  descends  from  middle  class  to  poor,  from  respectable  retail 
storekeepers  to  those  who  need  the  assistance  of  charity. 

The  neighborhood  as  a  whole  thus  shows  a  wide  heterogeneity, 
racially,  religiously  and  economically.  On  the  other  hand,  the  social 
problems  of  sanitation,  charity  and  assimilation,  though  not  absent, 
do  not  appear  in  the  acute  form  characteristic  of  the  congested 
neighborhoods  of  the  more  recent  immigrants.  Conspicuously  there 
are  no  ghettoes,  the  various  foreign  elements  being  distributed 
throughout  the  neighborhood.  The  conditions  are  more  nearly  like 
what  one  would  expect  in  a  section  where  the  immigration  problem 
was  not  the  all  engrossing  question.  Perhaps  for  this  reason  the  edu- 
cational agency  proper  for  such  a  neighborhood  would  be  typical  of 
the  ethnic  school  in  a  normal  American  urban  community. 

The  Jewish  element  in  the  population  shows  within  itself  a  hetero- 
geneity as  widely  distributed  as  that  in  the  general  community.  The 
total  Jewish  population  within  easy  walking  distance  from  the  Institute 
numbers  thirty-five  thousand.  For  convenience  in  description  it  may 
be  classified  into  four  divisions.  In  the  first  division  are  those  of  the 
highest  economic  class  who  live  in  the  Fifth  Avenue  district.  These, 
however,  are  a  small  proportion,  and  perhaps  should  not  be  counted  as 
a  part  of  the  neighborhood,  for  Fifth  Avenue  is  rather  a  national  than 
a  municipal  or  local  thoroughfare.  Still,  certain  individuals  in  this 


THE   CENTRAL  JEWISH    INSTITUTE  183 

population  have  taken  an  interest  in  the  Central  Jewish  Institute, 
albeit  from  a  communal  rather  than  local  point  of  view.  The  second 
and  third  divisions  center  around  two  prominent  synagogues,  the 
Congregation  Kehillath  Jeshurun,  adjoining  the  Central  Jewish 
Institute,  and  the  Congregation  Orach  Chayim,  on  Lexington  Avenue 
near  95th  Street. 

The  most  influential  element  in  the  work  of  the  Central  Jewish 
Institute  is  the  group  associated  with  the  Kehillath  Jeshurun  syna- 
gogue. This  group  consists  mainly  of  Russian  Jews  who  hail  from 
Lithuania  and  represent  the  first  wave  of  Russian  Jewish  immigra- 
tion of  the  80's  and  90's.  These  are  carefully  to  be  distinguished  from 
the  new  Russian  immigration  which  has  a  strong  element  of  radical- 
ism and  Yiddishism.  In  contradistinction  to  the  latter  these  Jews 
are  of  the  bourgeoisie,  well-to-do  and  distinctly  conservative.  In 
religion  they  are  orthodox,  which  implies  adherence  to  Jewish  cere- 
monies and  customs  and  an  allegiance  to  Jewish  life.  Although 
most  of  this  group  arrived  in  America  poor  men  and  have  acquired 
their  wealth  here,  they  come  from  families  which  were  respected  in 
the  social  life  of  the  Eastern  European  ghetto,  where  learning  was  the 
distinguishing  class  mark.  In  many  cases  the  rise  to  social  position 
through  wealth  is  merely  a  recuperation  of  status  previously  enjoyed 
by  dint  of  reputation  for  learning.  To  these,  of  course,  have  been 
added  others  whose  claim  to  be  included  in  this  community  rests 
not  upon  similarity  of  nativity  or  of  social  class  in  the  old  country, 
but  upon  their  economic  status  here  together  with  their  adherence  to 
'orthodoxy.'  This  entire  group  represents  the  highest  economic 
class  among  the  Russian  Jewry  of  New  York  City.1 

The  third  division  is  a  community  very  similar  to  the  foregoing 
group  but  consisting  of  German-Jews  and  centering  about  another 

Although  the  richer  portion  of  this  group  has  now  moved  to  the  west  side  of  Central 
Park. 

It  is  most  interesting  to  note  that  the  group  has  a  certain  amount  of  neighborhood 
community  spirit  within  itself;  families  know  each  other,  marriage  takes  place  among 
them  and  gossip  easily  spreads.  This  is  unusual  among  Jewjsh  communities,  because 
in  most  sections  of  the  city  the  Jewish  population  is  so  mobile  that  no  neighborhood 
feeling  can  exist.  It  is  the  synagogue  primarily  which  has  promoted  the  community 
of  spirit. 


184  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

synagogue,  namely  the  Orach  Chayim.  The  economic  status  of  the 
German-Jewish  group  is  similar  to  the  second  group  (i.e.,  of  Russian 
Jews  just  described),  although  these  tend  to  be  professional  men  and 
commission  merchants  rather  than  manufacturers.  They  represent 
also  an  older  stratum  of  neighborhood  population  and  have  been  in 
the  country  a  longer  time,  their  immigration  dating  from  the  period 
prior  to  1880.  This  group  also  has  a  community  spirit  among  its 
members,  but  has  tended  to  merge  with  the  Russian  Jewish  group. 
In  spite  of  the  feeling  akin  to  a  social  class  consciousness  which 
exists  between  Russian  and  German  Jews,  the  two  groups  have  been 
drawn  together  in  this  neighborhood  by  their  proximity,  their  similar 
economic  conditions  and  their  stand  on  orthodoxy.1 

These  three  groups  live  west  of  Lexington  Avenue,  which  is  the 
residential  district.  The  fourth  group  will  be  found  on  the  avenues 
and  streets  east  of  Lexington  Avenue.  They  are  more  recent  arrivals 
consisting  of  small  shopkeepers  and  workingmen.  Economically, 
they  range  from  those  who  make  a  living  to  the  very  poor.  In  nativ- 
ity they  are  Hungarian,  Austrian  and  Polish  Jews  of  the  new  immi- 
gration, though  not  perhaps  of  the  latest  tide.  Like  most  Jews  who 
come  from  Eastern  Europe,  they  observe  the  dietary  laws  and  attend 
synagogue  with  greater  or  lesser  frequency.  They  are  orthodox,  if 
we  use  this  term  to  describe  the  social  background  and  the  type  of  life 
rather  than  a  creed.  In  the  former  two  groups  orthodoxy  has  begun 
to  be  crystallized  into  a  convention.  It  has  become  an  issue,  for  the 
Jews  in  these  classes  have  had  to  resist  the  tendency  toward  the 
Reform  synagogue,  a  likely  concomitant  of  elevation  in  economic  and 
social  status.  With  the  Jew  of  the  fourth  group  'orthodoxy'  is  still 
the  natural  mode  of  life.  This  group  rather  than  the  former  two 
represents  the  ordinary  everyday  Jew  that  one  has  in  mind  in  think- 
ing of  the  Russian  Jew.2 

1Both  synagogues  are  orthodox,  aim  at  a  decorous  service,  and  favor  English  sermons. 

2  An  element  conspicuously  lacking  in  this  neighborhood  is  the  more  modern  Russian 
Jew,  who  had  broken  with  the  ghetto  before  he  arrived  and  who  already  had  been 
influenced  by  the  new  forces  of  Russian  life.  The  Socialist  of  the  distinct  and  easily 
recognized  Russian  Jew  type,  the  intellectual  Hebraist-Zionist,  and  the  Yiddishist- 
Radical  are  all  missing.  The  neighborhood  tends  rather  to  lean  toward  conservatism 
and  is  for  a  neighborhood  of  a  considerable  Jewish  population  unusually  lacking  in 
"social  movements." 


THE  CENTRAL  JEWISH    INSTITUTE  185 

These  descriptions  apply  to  the  adult  generation.  To  understand 
the  problem  of  the  Central  Jewish  Institute  it  is  necessary  to  have 
some  idea  of  the  tendencies  amongst  those  growing  into  manhood  and 
womanhood.  As  a  matter  of  fact  it  was  the  anxiety  for  the  coming 
generation  that  brought  the  Central  Jewish  Institute  into  being. 

The  adolescents  of  the  group  described  last  present  a  good  example 
of  the  "half-baked  second  generation."  They  have  become  thor- 
oughly "Americanized."  They  are  a  jolly  crowd,  know  the  batting 
averages  to  a  'T',  and  support  the  musical  comedies  regularly.  They 
are  adepts  in  "kidding,"  and  their  repartee,  which  is  abundant, 
can  always  be  traced  to  the  latest  vaudeville  shows.  Gum  chewing 
is  their  distinguishing  characteristic  and  they  are  very  "padriodig," 
as  they  pronounce  it.  The  better  of  these  gather  in  "literary  clubs" 
which  never  have  a  literary  program.  The  sessions  of  the  club  are 
generally  devoted  to  the  business  of  preparing  for  the  next  dance  or 
minstrel  show. 

They  know  little  of  Jewish  life,  tending  to  associate  it  merely  with 
the  ceremonies  and  especially  with  the  prohibitions  observed  in  the 
home,  the  significances  of  which  are  very  seldom,  if  ever,  understood. 
Their  "Jewish  culture"  is  limited  to  the  ability  to  read  the  Hebrew 
prayers  mechanically  without  understanding  the  meaning  of  the  text. 
They  are  generally  indifferent  to,  if  not  ashamed  of,  Jewish  life. 
Sometimes,  when  put  to  it,  they  assert  their  pride  in  being  Jews, 
the  psychical  compensation  for  their  real  self -depreciation.  Having 
gained  a  public  school  education  and  speaking  English  (with  a  New 
York,  not  a  foreign  accent),  they  tend  to  regard  themselves  supe- 
rior to  their  parents  and  everything  associated  with  them.  This 
cocksure  and  "  smart  guy "  attitude  is  carried  over  into  their 
general  character.  They  have  lost  whatever  culture  was  inherent 
in  the  customs  and  institutions  of  their  parents'  traditional  life,  and 
have  substituted  for  it  not  a  universal  culture,  or  even  an  American 
one,  but  the  ways  and  ideas  immediately  surrounding  them, — rag- 
time and  jazz  band,  baseball  averages  and,  at  the  height,  musical 
comedy,  together  with  an  individualistic  attitude  acquired  from  the 
bitter  competitive  industrial  scheme  into  which  they  have  been 
thrown.  The  type  described,  it  will  be  recognized,  is  not  particularly 


186  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

a  Jewish  type,  but  a  well  known  product  of  the  larger  American  city 
where  the  street  corner,  the  movies,  the  baseball  scores  and  musical 
comedy  are  the  true  educational  influences  for  the  adolescents  of  the 
economically  poorer  groups. 

While  this  description  would  apply  to  an  easily  recognizable  portion 
of  the  second  generation,  there  is  also  a  goodly  percentage  where  the 
home  influence  has  not  completely  broken  down.  This  would  be 
true  most  often  where  the  family  had  some  social  status  in  the  past 
and  where  it  has  been  able  to  meet  the  struggle  for  existence  with  some 
success.  In  these  cases,  especially  when  the  children  have  gone  on 
through  high  school  and  college,  the  crudities  in  general  personality 
are  minimized.  As  far  as  Jewish  knowledge  and  Jewish  loyalty  are 
concerned,  however,  the  same  general  conditions  exist.  There  are, 
indeed,  instances  when  an  unusually  favorable  family  influence  has 
been  able  to  withstand  the  disintegrating  environment  or  when  the 
college  Zionist  or  Menorah  society  has  kindled  a  spark  of  loyalty  to 
Jewish  tradition  in  the  vision  of  the  ideal  of  a  renascent  Jewish 
cultural  life.  But  these  are  the  exceptions,  not  the  rule. 

Among  the  well-to-do  similar  conditions  prevail,  except  that  a 
greater  number  have  gone  to  college,  and  more  often  crudeness  has 
been  avoided.  Business  and  the  professions  ultimately  absorb  these 
and  the  attachment  to  Jewish  life,  if  it  continues,  becomes  quite 
formal.  Most  often  Jewishness  for  these  is  a  matter  of  strange 
ceremonial,  observed  either  from  superstition,  as  a  mark  of  respect  for 
parents,  or  as  the  convention  of  the  social  set.  There  are  here,  too, 
notable  individual  examples  of  sympathy  with  and  intelligent  devotion 
to  Jewish  life. 

The  prevailing  characteristic  among  all  groups,  however,  is  the 
disintegration  of  the  ethnic  and  religious  culture  in  the  second  genera- 
tion. Too  often  the  process  is  not  counterbalanced  by  an  acquisition 
of  general  culture.  With  a  superficial  knowledge  of  the  socially 
approved  language  and  conventions  the  younger  members  of  the 
family  tend  to  regard  themselves  as  superior  to  their  parents,  espe- 
cially in  those  cases  where  in  the  fierce  economic  struggle  the  young 
people  contribute  to  the  support  of  the  family.  They  do  not  realize 
that  their  parents,  apparently  not  knowing,  may  still  be  wiser  and 


THE   CENTRAL  JEWISH    INSTITUTE  187 

more  cultured  than  they.  For  the  old  generation  represents  a  tradi- 
tion which  embodies  a  long  social  experience,  while  the  children  are 
bereft  of  all  but  a  very  superficial  outlook.  Frequently,  when  as 
among  the  'better'  classes  an  attempt  has  been  made  to  acquire  the 
manners  of  the  land,  the  lack  of  deep  roots  becomes  apparent,  and 
the  phenomenon  of  affectation  associated  with  nouveau-riche  is  often 
marked.  No  adequate  agency  is  at  hand  to  bridge  the  gap  between 
the  generations,  to  interpret  the  old  tradition  in  terms  of  the  new. 

The  work  that  led  to  the  creation  of  the  Central  Jewish  Institute 
was  initiated  among  the  members  of  the  Kehillath  Jeshurun  Congre- 
gation, the  synagogue  of  the  well-to-do  Russian  Jewish  group.  Loyal 
to  Judaism  and  anxious  that  their  children  should  remain  loyal,  they 
found  themselves  at  a  loss  when  they  saw  their  children  drift  away. 
Professor  M.  M.  Kaplan,  then  the  Rabbi  of  the  congregation  and 
principal  of  its  religious  school,  had  been  continuously  emphasizing 
the  importance  of  Jewish  education  in  the  task  of  fostering  Jewish  life 
and  the  necessity  of  reorganizing  Jewish  school  work  with  considera- 
tion of  the  surrounding  social  life.  It  was  due  to  his  influence  that 
discussion  arose  in  1908  that  culminated  in  the  establishment  of  the 
Central  Jewish  Institute.  This  underlying  motive  is  significant  in 
that  it  marks  a  new  era  in  Jewish  institutional  life.  The  earlier 
communal  efforts  had  been  conceived  in  a  philanthropic  spirit,  as 
means  for  the  betterment  of  others,  Here  it  was  the  interest  of  their 
own  children  that  the  founders  had  in  mind.1 

A  second  important  departure  from  the  then  current  notions  is  the 
conception  of  what  was  meant  by  a  Jewish  School.  Not  only  was  it 


1So  strong  was  this  point  made  that  some  interpreted  this  to  mean  an  institution  for 
their  own  use  exclusively.  Subsequently  the  most  influential  of  this  group  moved  to 
the  other  side  of  Central  Park,  and  a  new  and  very  interesting  institution,  "The  Jewish 
Center,"  was  established  by  them.  The  Jewish  Centre  modernizes  the  old  idea  of  the 
Synagogue  as  a  "Meeting  House,"  "House  of  Study,"  and  "House  of  Prayer."  It  is 
planned  as  a  palatial  ten-story  structure  with  complete  facilities  for  educational  and 
social  work.  It  provides  for  club  rooms,  gymnasium,  dining  hall,  classrooms,  audi- 
torium, etc.,  but  the  synagogue  is  at  the  centre  of  the  entire  conception.  The  concep- 
tion is  unique,  for  the  synagogue  is  built  right  into  the  structure,  as  its  central  archi- 
tectural feature.  It  is  not  a  general  public  institution,  but  a  clubhouse,  so  to  speak,  for 
the  families  of  the  members.  It  is  an  interesting  experiment  in  modern  reconstruction 
of  the  synagogue  as  a  social  centre.  While  strictly  orthodox,  it  completely  surpasses 
any  Reform  Temple  in  modernity  of  conception. 


188  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

planned  for  adequate  classroom  instruction;  the  idea  of  'school'  was 
broadened  to  include  auditorium,  reading  room,  social  room  and 
gymnasium,  to  provide  for  recreational,  social  and  general  educational 
activities.  Naturally  the  idea,  being  new,  provoked  opposition.  In 
this  center  of  'orthodoxy'  the  close  propinquity  of  shower  bath  and 
religious  school  seemed  sacrilegious  to  some  of  the  older  members  of 
the  congregation.  The  differences  were  so  violent  that  the  large 
plan,  which  involved  an  expenditure  hitherto  unheard  of  with  refer- 
ence to  Talmud  Torah,  might  have  fallen  through  had  it  not  been  for 
the  aggressive  personality  of  one  of  the  leading  spirits.  Samuel  I. 
Hyman,  to  whom  is  due  the  honor  of  being  the  founder  and  first 
president  of  the  Central  Jewish  Institute,  was  himself  a  character 
indicative  of  a  new  attitude.  Though  born  in  America,  he  was 
doggedly  loyal  to  orthodox  Judaism.  With  his  strict  Jewish  adherence 
he  combined  an  intense  loyalty  to  America,  and  believed  whole- 
heartedly in  the  possibility  of  harmonizing  the  two  forces.  Seeing  in 
the  local  educational  need  the  possibility  of  contributing  to  the 
solution  of  a  general  Jewish  problem,  he  determined  that  the  Insti- 
tute should  be  built  on  model  lines  so  that  it  might  become  the 
prototype  of  the  educational  institution  potent  to  preserve  Jewish 
life  in  America.  It  was  due  to  his  tireless  efforts  that  the  building  was 
erected  without  compromises.  The  cornerstone  was  laid  in  May, 
1915,  and  activities  began  in  the  fall  of  1916.  From  its  very  inception 
the  Institute  cooperated  with  the  Bureau  of  Jewish  Education  of 
New  York  City.1  Under  its  auspices  a  survey  of  the  neighborhood 
was  made,  before  activities  were  initiated,  with  the  purpose  of 
determining  possibilities  and  character  of  work.  This  procedure  of 
studying  the  district  before  beginning  work  symbolizes  the  new  atti- 
tude of  the  Institute,  the  substitution  of  a  plan  consciously  elaborated 
for  haphazard  and  traditional  methods. 

Throughout  the  plan  of  work  is  found  the  realization  that  the  new 
situation  demands  new  methods.  Nevertheless,  at  many  points 
conditions  had  to  be  reckoned  with.  From  the  foregoing  account 
may  be  gathered  some  of  the  circumstances  which  must  be  taken  into 

1For  the  scope  and  functions  of  the  Bureau  of  Jewish  Education,  see  Dushkin, 
Jewith  Education  in  New  York  City. 


THE   CENTRAL  JEWISH    INSTITUTE  189 

consideration  in  gauging  to  what  degree  the  Central  Jewish  Institute 
meets  the  ideal  of  the  ethnic  Community  Center.  In  the  description 
of  the  building  and  its  activities  which  follows,  it  will  be  instructive 
to  point  out  other  instances  where  the  Institute  fails  to  fulfill  ideal 
requirements.  However,  our  main  purpose  is  to  present  the  general 
principles  underlying  the  work,  to  show  what  types  of  activities  are 
carried  on,  their  purpose  and  emphasis. 

Before  entering  upon  his  duties  as  Executive  Director  in  1917,  the 
writer  submitted  a  "Policy  and  Plan  of  Work"  which  the  Trustees 
agreed  should  become  the  basis  of  the  work.  This  statement  can  still 
serve  very  well  as  a  concise  outline  of  the  plan.1  Its  main  ideas  were 
summarized  in  several  paragraphs  at  the  first  annual  meeting  held  in 
February,  1918.  It  may  be  interesting  to  state  them  here  before 
proceeding  to  the  detailed  description  of  the  work  of  the  institution. 

"The  underlying  idea  of  The  Central  Jewish  Institue  is  Talmud  Torah,'  as  is  in- 
dicated by  its  'sub-title.  The  preservation  of  Jewish  spiritual  life  is  the  idea  which 
gives  point  and  purpose  to  all  the  activities  of  the  institution. 

"With  all  its  strong  insistence  on  a  Jewish  purpose,  it  nevertheless  recognizes  the 
need  of  adjusting  to  the  conditions  of  American  life  and  thought.  The  harmonization 
of  Jewish  purpose  with  American  life  is  the  institution's  raison  d'  etre. 

"Insisting  on  an  intensive  course  in  Jewish  subjects  for  the  Talmud  Torah,  it 
nevertheless  maintains  that  those  who  cannot  be  induced  to  enroll  in  the  intensive 
work  must  not  be  entirely  neglected;  they  must  be  reached  through  a  scheme  of 
extension  education. 

"In  addition  to  specifically  Jewish  work,  the  Jewish  center  must  carry  on  activities 
which  make  for  the  physical  and  social  well-being  of  the  people  who  live  in  the  neigh- 
borhood. Health  and  good  citizenship  are  a  part  of,  and  not  oppesed  to,  Judaism. 

"Just  as  the  activity  of  the  Institute  should  not  be  limited  to  one  aspect  in  the  life 
of  the  individual,  so,  too,  it  should  not  be  limited  to  one  age  in  the  population.  The 
older  brother  and  sister  and  the  parents  must  be  reached.  Indeed,  no  member  of  the 
family  is  more  important  than  the  other.  For  the  task  is  to  bridge  the  gap  between 
the  generations,  to  integrate  the  family.  The  family  is  the  cornerstone  upon  which 
rests  the  integrity  and  continuity  of  Jewish  life. 

"In  fine,  the  Central  Jewish  Institute  hopes  to  make  a  contribution  to  the  solution 
of  the  problem  of  creating  the  educational  institution  that  will  be  potent  to  preserve 
a  vital  Jewish  life  in  America." 

1The  statement  appeared  in  The  Jewish  Teacher,  December,  1917,  under  title  "The 
Community  School  Center." 

The  plan  of  work  was  initiated  by  the  writer,  but  is  now  being  carried  on  under  the 
capable  direction  of  Mr.  A.  P.  Schoolman. 


190  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

III 

THE  BUILDING 

The  structure  is  itself  a  vital  part  of  the  plan.  The  Central  Jewish 
Institute  is  a  thoroughly  fire-proof  four  story  building,  standing  on  a 
lot  60  x  100  feet.  It  contains,  in  addition  to  ten  classrooms,  two 
kindergarten  rooms,  two  social  rooms,  a  sitting  and  reading  room, 
an  auditorium,  gymnasium,  kitchenette,  and  two  roof -gardens,  one 
adjoining  the  kindergarten  room,  the  other  on  the  top  of  the  building. 
Such  a  combination  of  facilities  has  hitherto  not  been  associated  with 
the  Talmud  Torah.  In  recent  years  the  need  of  facilities  for  general 
work  has  begun  to  be  recognized.  Talmud  Torahs  have  included  an 
assembly  hall  for  lectures  and  for  synagogue  purposes.  One  Talmud 
Torah  has  even  added  a  gymnasium.  But  the  Central  Jewish 
Institute  is  the  first  Jewish  educational  institution  in  New  York  City 
that  has  combined  all  facilities  for  social  work  with  thoroughly  ade- 
quate accommodation  for  school  work. 

Both  from  a  practical  and  aesthetic  point  of  view  it  sets  a  new 
standard.  It  has  made  admirable  use  of  its  space  and  at  the  same 
time  is  undoubtedly  the  most  beautiful  structure  in  New  York  City 
devoted  to  school  purposes  among  the  Jews.  It  has  been  done  in 
exceptionally  good  taste  and  with  an  eye  to  comfort  as  well  as  to  the 
needs  of  hard  usage.  Two  principles  of  primary  importance  for 
any  community  school  center  have  been  well  illustrated.  The  first  is 
that  of  the  convertible  unit.  A  room  utilized  for  one  purpose  at  one 
time  may  be  converted  to  serve  with  equal  adequacy  other  purposes 
when  necessary.  Thus  the  auditorium  may  serve  as  lecture  platform 
with  cinematograph  and  stereoptican  facilities,  as  a  stage  for  dramat- 
ics, and  as  a  synagogue.  What  is  meant  is  not  only  that  the  audi- 
torium can  be  made  to  serve  these  various  purposes,  but  that  through 
change  of  fixtures  and  decorations  it  is  actually  converted  from  one 
type  of  room  to  the  other.  So,  too,  the  gymnasium,  ordinarily  used 
for  calisthenics,  athletic  games  and  dances,  can  be  converted  into  a 
lunch  room  and  banquet  hall.  A  kitchenette  and  collapsible  tables 
are  at  hand  to  make  such  a  transition  of  usage  convenient  as  well  as 
possible.  The  classrooms  have  been  provided  with  movable,  instead 


THE   CENTRAL  JEWISH    INSTITUTE  191 

of  stationary  seats,  and  with  additional  closets,  so  that  they  are  equally 
available  for  the  regular  school  work  in  the  afternoons — and  for  the 
clubs  and  organizations  that  meet  in  the  evenings.  So  throughout 
the  building  the  addition  of  many  carefully  planned  details  enhances 
greatly  both  the  convenience  and  possibility  for  a  variety  of  use. 

The  second  principle  observed  was  that  of  organic  relationship. 
In  many  of  the  older  institutions  where  numerous  facilities  have  been 
provided  no  plan  or  purpose  or  underlying  motive  is  felt.  There  is  a 
shapelessness  and  ungainliness  about  the  building  that  has  led  to  the 
characterization  of  'barns.'  In  the  Central  Jewish  Institute  a  definite 
tone  prevails  and  the  unity  of  the  whole  institution  impresses  itself 
upon  the  visitor.  It  has  also  been  carefully  saved  from  assuming  the 
institutional  and  barrack-like  character  that  the  public  schools  as  well 
as  many  social  centers  have.  The  trees  and  ferns  in  front  of  the 
building,  the  flowerbeds  in  the  windows,  the  furnishings  in  the  library 
and  social  hall,  all  help  to  give  a  more  genial  and  intimate  impression. 
An  effort  has  been  made  to  illustrate  that  a  community  house,  though 
primarily  a  school,  ought  to  be  more  like  a  home  than  like  a  public 
asylum. 

There  is  one  direction,  perhaps,  in  which  the  institution  should  have 
gone  further.  The  Ethnic  Community  House,  in  its  architecture  and 
interior  decorations,  should  be  representative  of  the  type  of  civiliza- 
tion which  it  is  conceived  of  as  furthering.  Jewish  buildings  should, 
wherever  possible,  although  built  in  harmony  with  the  surroundings, 
utilize  whenever  possible  Jewish  motifs  and  designs.  One  should  be 
able,  in  passing  a  Jewish  Community  House,  to  know  what  it  is,  just 
as  one  can  recognize  a  Gothic  church  or  a  cathedral.  For  the  present, 
in  view  of  the  fact  that  there  is  no  developed  original  Jewish  architec- 
ture, nothing  more  than  the  utilization  of  certain  decorative  designs 
can  be  hoped  for.  Something  along  this  line  has  been  done  in  design- 
ing the  stage  curtain  and  the  pulpit  and  readers'  desk  in  connection 
with  the  synagogue.  More  will  need  to  be  done  through  appropriate 
pictures,  hangings  and  decorations.  The  underlying  principle  should 
be  borne  in  mind  that  the  embodiment  of  Jewish  ideas  in  architecture 
and  decoration  is  a  cultural  contribution  and  an  educational  influence. 


192  OF  AMERICANIZATION    THEORIES 

The  observation  of  these  concepts,  variety  of  usage,  organic  relation- 
ship to  give  a  unity  of  character,  a  warm  and  intimate  rather  than  institu- 
tionalized atmosphere,  and  the  unique  character  of  the  ethnic  group  em- 
bodied so  far  as  possible  in  architecture  and  decorations,  is  prerequisite 
to  a  full  realization  of  any  plan  of  work  that  may  be  laid  out  for 
ethnic  community  centers. 

IV 

CONTROL  AND  ADMINISTRATION 

The  responsibility  is  vested  in  a  virtually  self -perpetuating  Board  of 
Directors,  consisting  of  thirty-five  members.1  The  large  size  of  the 
board  is  due,  as  in  similar  cases,2  to  the  fact  that  in  the  past  the  main 
function  of  boards  of  Jewish  schools  has  been  to  raise  the  funds 
necessary  for  the  maintenance  of  the  institution.  The  members  were 
generally  chosen  either  because  of  their  large  contributions  or  their 
ability  to  solicit  funds  from  others.  The  directors  in  the  Central 
Jewish  Institute  actively  interested  in  the  work  number  less  than  ten, 
and  as  soon  as  the  financial  difficulties  shall  have  been  adjusted  the 
tendency  will  be  to  reduce  the  number  of  members  on  this  board 
more  nearly  to  the  active  workers. 

It  is  important  to  note  that  the  board  is  a  lay  body,  responsible  to 
itself  alone;  it  is  not  subject  to  any  clerical  or  other  organization. 
Though  the  Institute  is  the  outgrowth  of  the  congregational  school  of 
the  adjoining  synagogue,  the  board  is  an  entirely  separate  body. 
It  includes  a  number  of  rabbis,  but  these  enter  as  individuals  with  the 
same  duties  and  functions  as  the  lay  members.  The  directors  are 
drawn  mainly  from  the  second  and  third  classes  of  the  population 
described  above,  and  represent  the  two  synagogues,  Kehillath 
Jeshurun  and  Orach  Chayim.  The  Institute  is  an  'orthodox'  institu- 
tion; but  this  word  is  used  in  its  general  psychological  and  social 

JIn  accordance  with  the  constitution  the  board  should  consist  of  twenty-five  members 
to  be  elected  annually  by  the  members  contributing  to  the  support  of  the  institution. 
As  in  most  Talmud  Torahs,  this  institution  is  governed  by  custom,  not  by  constitution. 

*See  A.  M.  Dushkin,  Jewish  Education  in  New  York  City,  page  197  S.  Dr.  Dushkin 
recommends  a  board  of  nine  representing  the  parents,  neighborhood  and  community  at 
large.  This  is  undoubtedly  theoretically  correct  from  the  purely  administrative  point 
of  view,  but,  as  Dr.  Dushkin  recognizes,  difficult  to  introduce  under  present  conditions 
where  adequate  income  is  not  assured. 


THE   CENTRAL  JEWISH    INSTITUTE  193 

meaning,  rather  than  in  any  creedal  sense;  i.  e.,  to  indicate  respect  for 
tradition  and  for  Jewish  ceremonial  practice  and  to  point  out  that  in 
the  present  transitional  stage  in  which  all  forces  are  naturally  making 
for  change  and  disintegration  the  Institute  sees  its  own  task  as  one  of 
conservation.  Perhaps  most  of  all  the  term  'orthodox'  here  indicates 
that  the  central  interest  comes  from  within  Jewish  life  and  has  not 
been  forced  upon  it  from  the  outside.  Neither  the  organization  of 
the  board  nor  its  policy  are  parochial  in  spirit. 

The  independent  and  private  form  of  organization  is  counterbal- 
anced in  actual  practice  by  several  unofficial  checks.  The  policy  of 
Jewish  schools,  generally  speaking,  is  wholly  dependent  upon  the  wish 
of  its  directors  or  trustees.  A  number  of  influences,  semi-official  and 
unofficial,  have  become  active  in  the  work  of  the  Central  Jewish 
Institute  that  tend  to  make  its  control  in  reality  communal,  though  in 
form  it  is  private.  The  Institute  no  longer  depends  entirely  upon  the 
philanthropic  efforts  of  its  trustees.  Together  with  other  large  Tal- 
mud Torahs,  social  and  charitable  institutions,  it  receives  a  large 
part  of  its  income  from  the  Federation  of  Jewish  Philanthropic 
Societies  of  New  York  City.1  Although  the  Federation  is  prohibited 
by  its  own  laws  from  interfering  with  the  internal  policy  of  any  insti- 
tution, it  serves  nevertheless  as  a  check  upon  communal  work  through 
its  power  to  refuse  admission  to  institutions  and  to  determine  upon 
the  budgets  of  constituent  societies.2  In  presenting  its  needs  to  the 
Federation  the  Central  Jewish  Institute  acts,  together  with  the  other 
Talmud  Torahs  affiliated  with  the  Federation,  through  the  Board  of 
Jewish  School  Aid,  a  voluntary  organization  representative  of  the 
Jewish  schools  and  interested  in  the  development  of  Jewish  education. 
There  are  thus  two  communal  checks :  in  distributing  the  funds  the 
Federation  must  reckon  with  the  needs  of  all  the  communal  institu- 


1The  Federation  is  a  central  organization  which  collects  and  distributes  the  funds  for 
one  hundred  and  five  of  the  largest  Jewish  communal  institutions.  The  institutions 
affiliated  with  it  may  accept  no  contributions  for  current  expenses  from  members; 
their  membership  must  contribute  to  the  Federation  which  pools  the  resources  of  these 
nstitutions.  (See  Jewish  Communed  Register). 

2The  Jewish  schools  were  admitted  only  after  a  difficult  struggle.  The  directors  of 
the  Federation,  who  conceive  of  social  work  as  philanthropy,  did  not  at  first  recognize 
educational  work  as  coming  within  their  scope.  The  Jewish  schools,  however,  pointed 
out  that  the  presence  of  a  central  organization  attracting  all  the  larger  contributions 
preempted  the  field  for  them  and  prevented  their  obtaining  support. — The  Jewish 
Teacher,  May,  1917. 


194  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

tions  and  the  Jewish  schools  must  keep  pace  with  the  rest;  second, 
each  school  must  accommodate  itself  to  the  needs  of  the  other  schools. 

There  is  a  more  direct  force  arising  out  of  the  income  derived  from 
self-supporting  sources,  the  largest  part  of  which  consists  of  the  tuition 
fees  paid  by  the  children  who  attend  the  Talmud  Torah,  as  the  inten- 
sive class  work  is  called.  During  the  year  1917-1918  an  active 
Parents'  Association  was  formed  which  is  making  itself  felt  in  the  work 
of  the  Institute.  The  plan  is  to  give  the  parents  official  representa- 
tion on  the  board.  Especially  will  this  be  possible  when  a  greater 
proportion  of  the  funds  come  from  the  neighborhood  sources.1 

An  additional  unofficial  influence  is  exerted  by  the  workers  and 
teachers  of  the  institution  through  the  Executive  Director.  Responsi- 
bility for  carrying  out  the  policy  of  the  board  has  been  centralized  in 
the  executive  head,  and  the  committee  form  of  administration  in 
which  the  various  departments  were  directly  responsible  to  com- 
mittees of  the  board  has  been  wholly  eliminated.2  The  success  of 
the  work  of  the  Institute  has  in  great  measure  been  made  possible 
by  adopting  the  centralized  as  against  the  decentralized  method  of 
administration.  This  form  of  organization  has  permitted  the  Execu- 
tive Director  to  exert  a  guiding  influence  in  the  development  of  the 
work.  Through  the  workers  and  teachers  a  number  of  educational 
influences  are  indirectly  brought  to  bear  upon  the  Institute.  Among 
these  are  to  be  reckoned  the  Bureau  of  Jewish  Education,  the  Hebrew 
Principals'  Association,  and  the  Jewish  Teachers'  Association.  In 
addition,  contact  with  the  general  secular  educational  influences 
is  maintained  through  the  professional  interests  of  the  workers. 
Cooperation  with  various  civic  bodies  establishes  also  relationships 
with  the  general  community  at  large. 

The  government  of  the  Central  Jewish  Institute  is  thus  responsive 
to  a  wide  variety  of  influences  and  can  in  no  sense  be  regarded  as 
subject  to  the  opinions  of  a  small  number  of  private  individuals. 
In  form  of  organization,  however,  the  Institute  is  defective,  for  it  will 
be  recalled  that  the  various  influences  make  themselves  felt  through 
unofficial  channels.  Much  now  depends  upon  the  good  will  and 

1Since  the  above  was  written  this  idea  has  materialized;  the  president  of  the  Parents' 
Association  has  been  elected  a  member  of  the  Board  of  Trustees. 
2See  A.  M.  Dushkin,  Jewish  Education  in  New  York  City,  Part  II,  Chap.  IV. 


THE   CENTRAL   JEWISH    INSTITUTE  195 

wisdom  of  the  present  Board  of  Trustees,  and  the  strength  of  the 
Executive  Director.  If  the  neighborhood  and  communal  forces  were 
made  regular  and  official,  as  well  as  occasional  and  voluntary,  the 
government  of  the  Central  Jewish  Institute  would  become  truly 
representative  of  a  democratic  conception. 

V 

THE  PLAN  AND  CONTENT  OF  THE  WORK 
1.  THE  TALMUD  TORAH 

The  central  activity  of  the  Institute  embodying  the  purpose  for 
which  it  was  established  is  the  Talmud  Torah.  It  is  the  emphasis 
upon  this  phase  of  its  work  which  differentiates  the  Central  Jewish 
Institute  from  the  recreational  and  social  settlements  which  may 
appear  very  similar  to  superficial  observation.  It  is  not  alone  that 
more  time  is  given  to  the  Jewish  activities  and  that  they  occupy  a 
larger  place  among  the  total  activities.  What  is  more  important  to 
bear  in  mind  is  that  the  Talmud  Torah  is  the  central  activity  and 
gives  meaning  and  character  to  the  whole  institution.  It  is  this 
differentiated  purpose  of  the  promotion  of  Jewish  life  that  gives  to  the 
Central  Jewish  Institute  its  peculiar  significance.  Properly  speaking, 
the  work  of  Americanization  done  by  the  Educational  Alliance  is  a 
state  function,  as  is  also  the  recreational  work  of  the  Y.  M.  H.  A.'s. 
Such  activities  should  be  public,  not  sectarian.  Many  of  these 
institutions  are  of  great  temporary  benefit,  and  they  will  be  necessary 
until  the  state  has  equally  adequate  facilities  for  such  work.  But  it  is 
in  the  study  of  particularly  Jewish  things  that  Jewish  institutions 
must  ultimately  find  their  raison  d'etre.1 

THE  CURRICULUM 

The  curriculum,  presented  on  pages  196-97,  is  partly  a  response  to 
the  wishes  of  the  parents  and  partly  the  conception  of  those  in  charge 
of  the  school.  It  represents  a  modification  of  the  traditional  course 
to  the  needs  of  the  child  living  in  America.  The  discussion  will  bring 
out  in  the  most  important  instances  what  is  due  to  principle  and 
what  to  the  necessity  of  compromising  with  prevailing  conceptions. 

'See  Chap.  Ill  especially  pp.  100-106. 


196 


TALMUD      TORA 

SIX  YEAR  COURSE 


Year 

Prayer  Book 

Hrs. 
per 
Wk. 

Hrs. 
per 
Yr. 

Hebrew  Lan- 
guage and 
Literature 

Hrs. 
per 
Wk. 

Hrs. 
per 
Yr. 

Biblical  Litera- 
ture (in  Hebrew) 

Hrs. 
per 
Wk. 

Hrs 

E 

First 

Mechanics  of  Reading 
and  Translation  of 
Simple  Prayers  and 
Blessings. 

* 

120 

Graded 
Course  in 
Hebrew. 
Conversation, 
Reading, 
and  the 
Elements 
of  Compo- 

3 
4 

144 

192 

Second 

Sabbath  Service. 
Reading   and 
Selections   for 
Translation  and 
Explanation. 

* 

72 

Third 

Weekday  Services. 
(As  above) 

* 

36 

sition. 

^ 

120 

Pentateuch 
(Children's 
Edition). 

3 

144 

Fourth 

Holiday  Services. 
(As  above) 

K 

36 

Supervision 
of  Home 
Reading. 
Grammar 
and  Com- 
position. 

* 

84 

Former  Prophets, 
selections  from 
Psalms  and  Pro- 
verbs. 

3 

144 

Fifth 

Ethics  of  the  Fathers. 
(As  above) 

x 

36 

As  above. 

* 

120 

Latter  Prophets, 
(selections). 

« 

108 

Sixth 

Review  of  Various 
Services. 

K 

36 

As  above. 

IK 

84 

Latter  Prophets 
(selections). 

,« 

108 

Total 
Hours 

336 

744 

504 

URRICULUM 

AGE  OF  ENTRANCE:  8 


197 


History 

Hrs. 
per 
Wk. 

Hrs. 
per 
Yr. 

Customs, 
Ceremonies, 
Contempora- 
neous Life. 

Hrs. 

per 
Wk. 

Hrs. 
per 
Yr. 

Singing 

Hrs. 
per 
Wk. 

Hrs. 
per 
Yr. 

Total 
Hrs. 
per 
Wk. 

Total 
Hrs. 
per 
Yr. 

40  Jewish 
Heroes. 
(From 
Abraham 
toHerzl). 

K 

36 

Jews  of  Many 
Lands, 
Customs  and 
Ceremonies 
of  the  Home. 

% 

36 

Melodies  for 
Services  in 
the  Home. 
Folk  Songs. 

y2 

24 

? 

360 

Biblical  His- 
tory to  the 
Destruc- 
tion of  the 
First 
Temple. 

K 

36 

As  above 

x 

36 

As  above 
and 
Synagogue 
Responses. 

1A 

24 

| 

360 

Destruction 
of  the  First 
Temple  to 
Arabic 
Period. 

X 

36 

As  above. 

*A 

24 

* 

360 

Arabic  Period 
to  Modern 
Times. 

K 

36 

The  Jewish 
Calendar; 
The  Syna- 
gogue. 

% 

36 

As  above. 

* 

24 

* 

360 

History  of 
the  Jews  in 
America. 

IK 

72 

As  above. 

'A 

24 

^ 

360 

Review.  The 
Story  of  the 
Jewish  Peo- 
ple. 

« 

72 

The  Ameri- 
can Jewish 
Commun- 
ity and  Its 
Problems. 

H 

36 

As  above. 

H 

24 

« 

360 

288 

144 

144 

2160 

198  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

Hebrew.  Of  the  2160  hours  in  the  entire  six-year  schedule  1548 
hours  are  devoted  to  Hebrew  subjects :  744  are  devoted  to  the  Hebrew 
language  and  secular  literature,  504  hours  to  the  Sacred  Literature 
which  is  read  and  taught  in  Hebrew,  and  300  hours  to  the  Hebrew 
Prayer  Book.  To  those  who  regard  the  Jewish  school  as  a  religious 
school  and  who  think  of  religion  in  terms  of  ethical  and  theological 
teachings,  this  condition  of  affairs  may  be  surprising,  all  the  more  so 
when  a  further  study  of  the  curriculum  does  not  reveal  any  special 
place  for  direct  religious  or  ethical  instruction.  This  can  appear 
strange  only  when  the  nature  of  the  Jewish  group  and  what  Western 
thought  terms  its  religion  are  not  understood.  As  we  have  already 
noted  above,  Judaism  is  a  term  like  Hellenism,  in  which  it  is  implied 
that  the  social  heritage  is  the  product  of  a  definite  national  group. 
What  makes  the  whole  matter  confusing  is  that  while  Hellenism  finds 
its  expression  mainly  in  artistic  and  intellectual  fields,  Israel  finds  its 
highest  national  expression  in  social  ethics  and  ethical  religion. 
Judaism  is  a  religious  civilization.  It  will  be  noted  that  most  of  the 
"literature"  would  be  called  "religious  literature."  Even  the  selec- 
tions in  the  secular  literature  would  deal  very  often  with  matters  of 
religious  interest  like  the  Jewish  holidays  or  with  Jewish  ethics  or 
Jewish  history.  The  proportion  of  time  under  the  subject  of  Hebrew 
devoted  to  belles  lettres  is  very  small.  On  the  other  hand,  a  Jewish 
school  is  never  a  place  merely  for  the  study  of  creed  and  ceremonies. 
The  emphasis  upon  the  study  of  Hebrew  is  the  central  characteristic 
of  all  traditional  Jewish  schools. 

The  so-called  "natural  method"  has  been  adopted  in  the  teaching  of 
Hebrew.  Competent  authorities  agree  that  this  method  is  pedagogi- 
cally  superior  in  the  teaching  of  foreign  languages  and  its  excellence  in 
this  respect  would  have  sufficiently  warranted  the  elimination  of  the 
older  methods  of  translation,  vocabulary  building  and  drills  in  gram- 
mar. The  introduction  of  the  new  method  in  Jewish  schools  has 
undoubtedly  been  influenced  also  by  the  development  of  the  hope 
for  national  regeneration  and  by  the  growth  of  modern  Hebrew  litera- 
ture. The  use  of  Hebrew  in  conversation  tends  to  make  the  pupil 
feel  that  the  language  is  living  and  that  the  people  still  lives.  It  makes 
the  ancient  literature  live  again  and  opens  the  gateway  to  the  modern 


THE   CENTRAL  JEWISH    INSTITUTE  199 

literature  and  to  the  new  life  developing  in  Palestine.  A  knowledge 
of  Hebrew  gives  the  individual  direct  access  to  the  means  of  a  true 
understanding  of  the  literary  sources  of  Jewish  spiritual  life  which  are 
also  the  sources  of  many  of  the  religious  and  moral  conceptions  of 
Europe.1  The  study  of  Hebrew,  furthermore,  is  of  supreme  signifi- 
cance for  the  present  and  future  of  Jewish  life.  With  the  passing  of 
Yiddish  as  the  Ghetto  breaks  up,  Hebrew  alone  can  remain  the 
distinguishing  Jewish  language.  While  the  language  of  the  country  of 
citizenship  must  become  for  Jews  their  ordinary  medium  for  inter- 
course, the  community  of  All  Israel  must  have  ijs  common  language. 
Hebrew  must  serve  as  means  of  interchange  of  thought  between  the 
various  Jewish  communities  of  the  world  and  between  them  and 
Palestine.  The  complete  forgetting  of  a  distinctive  tongue  will 
undoubtedly  mean  complete  obliteration  of  the  Jewish  group.  No 
Jewish  community  is  ever  known  to  have  survived  long  after  it  had 
given  up  its  distinctive  mode  of  expression.  Language  and  the 
thought  of  life  seem  inextricably  bound  up.  Professor  Schechter's 
dictum,  "When  the  last  word  of  Hebrew  shall  have  been  heard  in  our 
Synagogues,  then,  too,  there  shall  be  the  last  of  Judaism,"  finds  a  deep 
echo  in  the  Jewish  consciousness.2 

The  Prayer  Book.  In  the  study  of  the  Prayer  Book  we  come  upon  a 
subject  more  distinctly  a  part  of  the  religious  phase  of  Jewish  life. 
The  aim  of  the  course  is  to  enable  the  pupils  to  read  the  liturgy  (which, 
of  course,  is  in  Hebrew),  to  know  the  order  of  the  various  services, 
and  to  understand  the  most  important  passages.  Religious  services 
in  both  the  home  and  the  synagogue  are  such  an  integral  part  of 
Jewish  social  life  that  the  teaching  of  the  Prayer  Book  is  traditionally 
considered  the  first  step  in  any  system  of  Jewish  education. 

Paradoxical  as  it  may  seem,  this  emphasis  upon  the  teaching  of 
prayers  has  proved  a  serious  obstacle  to  the  development  of  an 
effective  curriculum  of  Jewish  instruction.3  The  father  through  daily 
repetition  of  the  prayers  for  many  years  has  attained  great  skill  in 
saying  them  off  very  rapidly,  not  realizing  that  his  accomplishment 

'See  Chap.  IV. 

2Solomon  Schechter,  The  Problem  of  Religious  Education  in  Seminary  Addresses. 

3See  Dushkin,  Jewish  Education  in  New  York  City,  p.  350. 


200  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

has  been  gained  through  practice  outside  of  the  school  as  well  as 
through  attendance  in  the  'cheder'  (which  was  in  his  Eastern  European 
home  an  all-day  affair).  He  expects  the  Hebrew  school,  with  its 
comparatively  few  hours,  to  reach  an  exacting  standard  of  rapidity 
in  reading.  In  America,  where  parents  do  not  expect  too  much  from 
their  children  in  the  matter  of  Jewish  education,  the  ability  to  read 
Hebrew  mechanically  is  often  completely  identified  with  Jewish 
education.  In  response  to  this  demand  a  considerable  portion  of  the 
time  is  devoted  to  the  Prayer  Book,  in  the  first  and  second  years, 
although  its  content  is  for  the  most  part  beyond  the  understanding 
of  the  child.  In  a  properly  ordered  curriculum,  this  subject  should 
be  postponed  until  the  higher  grades.  The  difficulty  of  the  Prayers, 
at  this  age,  necessitates  the  use  of  the  translation  method  instead  of 
the  more  interesting  and  more  effective  'natural'  method  adopted  in 
the  course  in  Hebrew  and  Literature. 

It  must  be  remembered  in  this  discussion  that  the  Hebrew  Prayer 
Book,  furthermore,  is  as  much  a  body  of  literature  as  it  is  a  collection 
of  liturgy.  It  includes  excerpts  from  the  Bible  and  from  Psalms  and 
the  portions  of  direct  prayer  are  few.  It  is  a  service  of  the  People  of 
Israel  to  its  God  rather  than  a  relationship  of  the  individual  to  the 
deity.  Nationalistic  Jews,  disclaiming  the  religious  tie,  might  still 
study  it  as  a  literary  expression  of  the  national  soul.  Thus  the  most 
'religious'  of  the  subjects  of  the  curriculum  has  a  literary  and  national 
aspect,  just  as  the  cultural  and  literary  aspect  has  a  religious  bent. 
It  is  necessary  constantly  to  bear  in  mind  the  unitary  character  of  the 
curriculum,  so  as  not  to  fall  into  the  artificial  'religious'  and  'national- 
istic' emphasis. 

History  and  Customs  and  Institutions.  The  subjects  under  history, 
customs,  ceremonies  and  contemporary  Jewish  life  are  taught  in 
English  and  represent  studies  descriptive  of  Jewish  life.  The  func- 
tion of  these  subjects  is  to  summarize,  to  put  in  proper  perspective,  to 
clarify  the  significance  of  the  events,  products  and  customs  of  Jewish 
life. 

Several  points  are  worthy  of  note  in  connection  with  the  method 
followed  in  the  teaching  of  history.  Jewish  history,  even  in  the 
biblical  periods,  is  treated  as  history,  not  as  a  groundwork  for  'moral 


THE   CENTRAL  JEWISH    INSTITUTE  201 

lessons.'  Whatever  'ethical'  or  'religious'  training  is  given  results 
from  the  study  of  the  content,  not  from  any  direct  attempt  to  inculcate 
moral  maxims  or  catechetical  solutions  to  problems.  For  this  reason 
as  well  as  because  the  Jewish  people  is  conceived  of  as  still  living, 
Jewish  history  is  brought  up  to  modern  times,  and  equal  emphasis  is 
given  to  biblical  and  post-biblical  periods.  The  course  includes, 
for  instance,  a  year's  work  in  the  history  of  the  Jews  in  the  United 
States.  Too  often  the  teaching  of  'history'  in  the  Sunday  schools  has 
left  the  pupils  with  the  notion  that  the  Jewish  people  is  a  strange 
extinct  people  who  lived  in  the  dim  past,  governed  by  supernatural 
laws  of  development.  It  is  perhaps  not  surprising  that  their  con- 
clusion would  be  that  such  a  people  could  really  have  no  place  in  our 
modern  natural  world.  The  organization  as  well  as  material  and 
spirit  of  the  course  differs  from  the  usual  mode  of  procedure.  The 
history  is  taught  in  a  series  of  cycles.  This  permits  the  child  who 
attends  only  one  or  two  years  to  attain  the  perspective  which  is 
essential  in  the  teaching  of  history.  It  permits  also  review  of  histori- 
cal periods  from  various  points  of  view  as  the  child  develops  in  age. 
The  course  in  social  life  includes  both  strictly  religious  ceremonies, 
social  customs  and  much  that  falls  in  between.  Beginning  with  a 
description  of  "Jews  in  many  lands,"  the  course  proceeds  to  study 
those  customs  which  identify  Jews.  This  course  also  includes  in  the 
last  year  a  survey  of  Jewish  communal  life  in  the  United  States,  with 
an  attempt  to  present  in  a  simple  way  the  problems  which  confront  it. 

The  Jewish  Sabbath  and  Holidays.  The  Sabbath  and  Holidays, 
though  not  appearing  as  separate  subjects  in  the  curriculum,  form, 
nevertheless,  an  important  element.  These  institutions  which 
embody  the  most  significant  ideas  in  Jewish  life  are  really  a  subject  of 
study  in  all  the  courses  in  the  curriculum.  In  addition  to  treating 
these  holidays  in  numerous  places  both  incidentally  and  directly, 
the  course  of  study  is  interrupted  for  a  lesson  or  two  whenever  a  holi- 
day appears  on  the  calendar  and  time  is  devoted  to  a  study  of  the 
particular  holiday,  from  its  various  phases,  liturgic,  ceremonial, 
historical,  etc.  Special  children's  services  are  conducted  on  the 
Sabbath  and  on  the  Festivals,  though  not  on  the  High  Holy  Days. 
As  described  below,  in  addition  extra-curricular  activities,  entertain- 


202  THEORIES   OF  AMERICANIZATION 

ments  and  plays  are  conducted  for  the  neighborhood  to  mark  the 
festivals. 

AIMS   OF  THE   CURRICULUM 

The  aims  of  the  curriculum  of  the  Talmud  Torah  may  be  summa- 
rized as  follows : 

1.  To  give  a  knowledge  of  the  Hebrew  language. 

a.     To  open  up  for  direct  appreciation  the  storehouse  of 

classic  (Bible,  etc.)  and  modern  Hebrew  literature. 
6.     To  teach  its  peculiarly  significant  concepts  which  deal 

with  social  and  religious  ideals. 
c.     To  form  a  bond  of  union  with  the  Jewish  past  and  the 

Jewish  present  in  other  lands,  especially  with  the  new  life 

in  Palestine. 

2.  To  transmit  the  significant  cultural,  religious,  and  social  herit- 
age of  the  Jewish  people  through  a  knowledge  of  its  history,  literature, 
customs,  and  religious  practices. 

3.  To  bind  the  child  in  loyalty  to  the  Jewish  People  so  that  he  may 
strive  for  a  continuous  development  of  its  ideal — cultural,  social, 
religious — aspirations. 

4.  To  give  some  notion  of  the  general  problems  facing  the  Jewish 
People  in  its  desire  to  perpetuate  itself  as  a  free  society  and  the  partic- 
ular problems  involved  in  the  task  of  adjustment  to  life  in  America. 

In  short,  the  work  of  the  Talmud  Torah  consists  in  converting  the 
physical  Jew,  who  is  so  by  birth,  into  a  spiritual  Jew,  who  remains  so 
by  reason  of  the  ideal  significance  of  Jewish  life. 

THE   SCHEDULE 

The  most  serious  administrative  problem  of  the  Talmud  Torah  is 
to  organize  its  work  properly  within  the  limited  number  of  hours  at 
its  disposal.  As  the  many  references  have  already  made  clear,  the 
Talmud  Torah  is  a  complementary  weekday  school,  i.e.,  sessions  are 
conducted  afternoons  and  Sundays  so  as  not  to  conflict  with  public 
school  hours.  This  gives  rise  to  two  difficulties.  The  rich  curricu- 
lum must  be  taught  in  a  minimum  number  of  hours,  so  as  not  to 


THE   CENTRAL   JEWISH    INSTITUTE  203 

encroach  unduly  upon  the  child's  study  and  play  time.  In  the  second 
place  each  teacher  must  have  sufficient  hours  of  instruction  to  enable 
him  to  earn  a  livelihood.  Only  professionally  trained  teachers  are 
qualified  to  teach  in  the  Talmud  Torahs.  The  standard  of  scholar- 
ship is  far  beyond  what  would  be  expected  of  a  teacher  in  the  public 
schools.  Full  time  positions  require  from  twenty  to  twenty-four 
hours  of  service  on  the  part  of  the  teacher.1  The  necessity  of  crowd- 
ing more  than  twenty  hours  into  the  afternoons  of  Monday,  Tuesday, 
Wednesday  and  Thursday2  and  on  Sunday  mornings  has  forced  a 
schedule  upon  the  Talmud  Torah  which  requires  attendance  for  some 
of  the  pupils  at  late  hours;  most  of  the  Talmud  Torahs  are  conducted 
up  to  8  P.  M.  and  some  even  as  late  as  9  p.  M. 

The  schedule  adopted  at  the  Central  Jewish  Institute  endeavors  to 
eliminate  this  condition  as  well  as  to  arrange  the  hours  in  number 
and  distribution  so  as  not  t6  interfere  unduly  with  the  free  time  of  the 
child.  Each  teacher  has  two  classes  and  each  class  about  eight  hours 
per  week  (inclusive  of  auditorium  session) . 

The  sessions  are  conducted  from  4  to  6  P.  M.,  on  Mondays,  Tues- 
days, Wednesdays,  Thursdays;  on  Saturdays  from  2  to  5  P.  M.  and 
Sundays,  9  A.  M.  to  12.30  A.  M.  The  schedule  would  run  as  follows: 

Monday  4-6  Tuesday  £-6  Wednesday  4-6  Thursday  4-6 

Class  A  Class  B  Class.A  Class  B 

Saturday  Sunday 

Class  A  2-3:30  Class  A  9-10:30 

Sabbath  Services  3:30-4:30  School  Assembly  10:30-11 

Class  B  4-6  Class  B  11-12:30 

The  improvement  in  time  distribution,  it  will  be  seen,  is  due  to  the 
reduction  of  the  number  of  sessions  per  teacher  with  a  consequent 
reduction  of  the  total  number  of  hours  from  20  to  16,  which  must  be 
compressed  into  hours  left  free  from  public  school,  and  to  the  intro- 
duction of  Saturday  as  a  school  day.  Although  in  the  traditional 
Talmud  Torah,  Saturday  is  not  used  as  a  school  day,  it  is  not  in  dis- 
accord with  Jewish  thought  to  'learn'  on  the  Sabbath.  The  freedom 
from  public  school  lessons  and  the  opportunity  of  conducting  services 

irThe  average  number  of  hours  of  instruction  per  week  per  class  in  the  Talmud  Torahs 
is  about  eight,  although  many  classes  receive  as  many  as  10  hours  and  occasionally 
even  more. 

2Friday  afternoon  is  too  close  to  the  Jewish  Sabbath  which  begins  on  Friday  evening. 


204  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

combine  to  make  Saturday  valuable  as  a  day  of  study.  The  new 
schedule,  which  permits  the  child  to  have  three  afternoons  free  from 
school  work  and  on  the  other  days  keeps  the  children  only  until  six,  is 
excellent  in  comparison  with  the  old  schedules  followed  in  the  Talmud 
Torahs.  Nevertheless,  it  still  presents  two  difficulties.  The  children 
must  attend  school  for  two  hours  additional  to  the  public  school  on 
two  days  a  week  and  the  long  school  day  is  not  wholly  eliminated.1 

In  the  second  place,  even  this  scheme  is  hardly  feasible  for  the 
average  Talmud  Torah.  The  reduction  in  the  number  of  sessions 
and  total  hours  allotted  to  each  teacher  increases  the  per  capita  cost 
of  teaching  over  50  per  cent.  For  this  reason  the  Central  Jewish 
Institute,  too,  may  be  forced  much  against  its  will  to  adopt  a  sched- 
ule which  will  keep  the  school  open  till  7  p.  M. 

The  difficulties  involved  in  the  schedule  cannot  be  ultimately 
solved  without  a  recognition  on  the  part  of  the  state  schools  that 
sufficient  time  must  be  left  from  the  school  day  for  such  private 
agencies  as  are  represented  by  the  ethnic  schools.  The  Gary  scheme 
has  recognized  the  validity  of  the  principle  of  correlation,  but  the 
particular  schedule  suggested  would  have  been  even  worse,  so  far  as 
Jewish  schools  are  concerned,  than  the  present  scheme.2  As  conditions 
are  to-day  the  ethnic  schools  are  placed  under  a  handicap  so  difficult 
as  to  be  almost  prohibitory  and  some  have  been  led  to  propose  sepa- 
rate schools  for  the  ethnic  and  religious  groups  which  will  give  a 
fairer  distribution  of  time  between  secular  and  other  subjects.  In 
fact,  the  whole  argument  of  Jewish  parochial  schools  is  based  on  this 
question  of  distribution  of  time.  It  is  seen  here  how  failure  on  the 
part  of  the  state  to  reckon  with  what  may  be  considered  the  justifiable 
demands  of  a  group  may  force  the  group  into  an  equally  unjustifiable 
position. 

The  French  system  where  the  children  are  excused  on  Thursdays  for 
religious  instruction  offers  an  example  of  correlation  between  public 
and  other  education.  Under  the  prevailing  conditions  in  New  York 
City,  if  the  Jewish  children  who  wish  to  attend  Hebrew  schools  were 
excused  two  afternoons  during  the  week,  a  schedule  could  be  worked 

1The  younger  children  have  only  one  hour  sessions  on  the  public  school  days,  but 
come  four  times,  Monday.  Tuesday,  Wednesday,  Thursday  instead  of  two. 
2See  Chap.  V,  pp.  171-2. 


THE   CENTRAL  JEWISH    INSTITUTE  205 

out  which  would  offer  a  satisfactory  solution.  Such  a  suggestion 
seems  Utopian  at  present.  The  various  ethnic  and  religious  bodies 
are  not  sufficiently  conscious  of  the  importance  of  education  for  the 
retention  of  the  group  identity;  nor  are  those  who  do  realize  this  fact 
at  one  in  the  acceptance  of  a  weekday  school  as  a  solution.  With 
such  lack  of  organization  of  the  ethnic  and  religious  viewpoint  no 
forceful  demand  can  be  made  upon  the  schools  of  the  state.  Further- 
more, the  prevailing  spirit  among  public  school  leaders  would  perhaps 
not  favor  such  a  plan.  While  the  minority  ethnic  groups  are  expected 
on  every  occasion  to  adjust  themselves  in  line  with  reasonable 
demands  of  the  state,  it  is  questionable  whether  the  state  is  yet 
amenable  to  the  virtue  of  noblesse  oblige  in  such  matters.  The  essen- 
tial theoretical  point  in  reference  to  the  schedule  is  that  the 
argument  long  carried  on  between  Church  and  State  rights  in  educa- 
tion must  receive  its  solution  in  a  denial  of  exclusive  monopoly  for 
either  the  one  or  the  other  and  in  the  acceptance  of  a  conception  of 
sovereignty  limited  by  the  need  of  mutual  consideration. 

To  what  degree  each  should  modify  its  present  plan  is  no  endless 
academic  question.  The  debatable  ground  is  very  narrow.  Few, 
if  any,  of  those  granting  the  principle  of  a  double  system  would  en- 
croach very  much  on  the  present  allotment  of  time  to  the  state 
schools.  The  great  majority  of  Jews  would  be  satisfied  with  an  educa- 
tional scheme  that  devoted  eight  hours  a  week  to  Jewish  studies. 
Utilizing  Saturday  and  Sunday,  this  would  mean  that  the  highest 
demand  of  by  far  the  largest  percentage  of  Jews  would  be  satisfied 
with  a  schedule  that  would  excuse  the  child  from  public  school  about 
four  or  five  hours  a  week.  Undoubtedly  this  would  not  interfere 
with  the  good  or  rights  of  the  state;  and,  were  the  public  educational 
mind  ready  for  such  a  conception,  there  would  be  no  real  obstacle 
to  the  attainment  of  such  a  solution.  The  real  difficulty  is  the  pro- 
found, if  unconscious,  belief  in  the  exclusive  sovereignty  of  the  state. 

2.    JEWISH  EXTENSION  EDUCATION 

The  intensive  curriculum  of  the  Talmud  Torah  is  a  development 
from  the  traditional  course  of  Jewish  study,  as  the  name  Talmud 
Torah  already  implies.  The  necessity  of  present  circumstances  and 
modern  conditions  have  entered  to  modify  both  content  and  method; 


206  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

but  in  the  main  the  basic  elements,  the  central  position  of  book  learn- 
ing and  classroom  method,  are  still  the  distinguishing  characteristics. 
Although  the  variety  of  conditions  has  led  to  the  development  of 
several  types  of  curricula,  these  basic  elements  are  always  repeated. 
In  recent  years  it  has  become  recognized  that  this  single  type  of 
intensive  Jewish  instruction  for  all  is  not  adequate  for  the  conditions 
confronting  Jewish  life  in  America.  In  the  old  centers  of  Jewish 
life  the  traditional  custom  of  giving  boys  an  intensive  Jewish  literary 
training  had  a  strong  hold  upon  the  masses  and  practically  all  boys 
were  sent  to  a  'cheder'.  Those  who  could,  assimilated  the  difficult 
course  of  study.  Those  who  could  not,  were,  nevertheless,  not 
deprived  of  Jewish  influence.  The  Jewish  school  in  the  Ghetto, 
though  much  more  intensive  than  the  Talmud  Torah  in  America  (it 
was  an  all  day  school),  was  but  one  element  in  the  Jewish  education  of 
the  child.  The  home  and  the  whole  social  environment,  language  and 
social  intercourse  were  Jewish  and  there  was  no  active  divergent  cul- 
ture to  lessen  the  influence  they  exerted.  Even, the  girls  who  seldom 
went  to  school  received  through  the  home  and  through  participation 
in  Jewish  life  an  education  adequate  to  their  Jewish  responsibil- 
ities. The  transition  to  conditions  of  life  in  America  has  completely 
changed  the  situation  through  the  elimination  of  these  spontaneous 
indirect  educational  influences.  In  a  large  and  heterogeneous  Jewish 
population  the  pressure  formerly  exercised  by  social  opinion  in  the 
well-organized  Jewish  communities  in  Eastern  European  countries  is 
no  longer  felt.  The  emphasis  which  the  struggling  immigrant  must 
place  upon  the  economic  aspect  of  his  life,  the  disintegrating  influence 
of  new  and  diverging  ideas,  the  presence  of  the  public  school  usurping 
most  of  the  child's  time,  together  with  the  extra  burden  of  an  addi- 
tional tuition  fee  in  the  face  of  apparently  free  public  schools,  are  all 
factors  which  deter  many  from  sending  their  children  to  intensive 
Jewish  schools.  Only  twenty-five  per  cent  of  the  Jewish  children  of 
school  age  attend  Hebrew  schools  at  any  one  time.  The  problem 
thus  arises  to  develop  some  system  of  extension  education  with  small 
per  capita  cost,  which  would  not  take  too  much  of  the  child's  time 
but  which  would  give  some  modicum  of  Jewish  education  to  those  who 
for  one  reason  or  another  cannot  or  do  not  wish  to  attend  the  intensive 
work  of  the  Talmud  Torah. 


THE   CENTRAL  JEWISH    INSTITUTE  207 

For  adolescents  there  is  no  traditional  scheme  to  take  the  place  of 
the  educational  influence  of  the  general  social  environment.  For  the 
young  people  intensive  classroom  work  is  no  solution  at  all  except  for 
the  very  few.  Even  in  public  education  the  comparatively  small 
number  that  attend  the  high  schools  are  motivated  in  great  part  by 
an  ultimate  vocational  aim.  It  is  not  to  be  expected  that  a  great 
number  of  young  people  will  after  a  day's  work  or  after  high  school 
hours,  with  the  difficult  program  of  'home  work,'  devote  themselves 
to  Jewish  studies  which  have  no  'practical'  application.  The  absence 
of  any  Jewish  educational  scheme  for  adolescents  suitable  to  condi- 
tions in  America  presents  a  crucial  problem  in  the  task  of  the  per- 
petuation of  Jewish  life  in  this  country.  In  this  critical  period  of 
questioning  and  doubt,  when  many  new  desires,  interests  and  loyal- 
ties are  awakened,  the  Jewish  loyalty  involving  some  spiritual  vision 
and  kept  at  times  only  through  personal  sacrifices,  becomes  very 
difficult  to  retain.  Without  providing  some  educational  scheme  it 
becomes  absurd  to  expect  the  Jewish  youth  not  to  drift  away,  with  the 
consequent  disintegration  of  Jewish  life. 

The  parents  also  no  longer  have  the  same  opportunities  for  continu- 
ing their  Jewish  life  through  participation.  For  them,  too,  is  needed 
some  agency  to  acquaint  them  with  the  new  problems  arising  out  of 
the  changed  conditions  of  life.  In  short,  the  new  situation,  that  of 
attempting  to  live  a  Jewish  life  outside  of  the  confines  of  the  ghetto, 
has  taken  from  Jewish  life  the  spontaneous  and  natural  influences  of  a 
permeating  Jewish  social  life  and  has  given  rise  to  the  necessity  of 
creating  some  scheme  of  direct  education  for  the  masses. 

It  is  evident  that  no  classroom  work  can  combat  with  these  prob- 
lems. There  have  developed  in  recent  years  a  number  of  plans  of 
Jewish  extension  education,  especially  in  reference  to  the  problem  of 
the  children.  The  most  comprehensive  of  these  is  the  extension 
work  planned  for  children  and  young  people  by  the  Bureau  of  Jewish 
Education  known  as  the  Circle  of  Jewish  Children  and  the  League  of 
the  Jewish  Youth.  The  plan  of  extension  education  carried  on  in  the 
Central  Jewish  Institute  in  the  work  with  children  and  young  people 
follows  these  general  schemes.  In  the  work  with  the  parents  current 
ideas  of  Parents'  Associations  have  offered  the  suggestions. 


208  THEORIES    OF   AMERICANIZATION 

A  full  description  of  the  extension  work  is  beyond  the  scope  of  our 
purpose.  The  following  brief  analysis  will  give  an  idea  of  the  lines  of 
work.  Schedules  of  regular  activities,  calendars  of  seasonal  events 
and  several  illustrative  programs  are  presented  from  which  a  more 
complete  picture  may  be  drawn. 

The  Circle  of  Jewish  Children.  The  work  of  the  Circle  of  Jewish 
Children  is  carried  on  through  mass  activities  centering  about  the 
celebration  of  the  Jewish  Festivals  and  through  supervised  club  work 
correlated  with  the  festival  celebrations.  The  plan  differs  from  simi- 
lar schemes  of  mass  and  club  activities  in  two  important  ways.  In 
the  first  place,  an  attempt  is  made  to  reach  the  same  child  through  a 
number  of  celebrations  and  record  is  kept  on  a  cumulative  record  card 
of  the  activities  in  which  each  member  has  participated.  In  the  sec- 
ond place,  the  activities  compose  a  regular  curriculum  of  studies 
carefully  planned  to  make  the  greatest  use  of  the  limited  time. 

The  organization  of  members  is  controlled  through  the  children 
attending  the  Talmud  Torah.  Leaders  are  selected  from  among 
the  brightest  and  most  active  pupils.  Each  leader  then  finds  ten 
playmates  in  the  neighborhood  and  arranges  them  into  a  group. 
These  become  members  of  the  Circle  by  signifying  their  desire  to 
join  and  receiving  a  button  and  certificate.  By  selecting  the  leaders 
with  reference  to  the  block  upon  which  they  live,  it  is  possible  through 
this  scheme  of  organization  to  cover  an  entire  neighborhood.  The 
leaders  themselves  form  a  club  or  council  where  they  receive  instruc- 
tion and  training  in  the  proper  performance  of  their  duties. 

The  leader  thus  serves  as  the  agent  between  the  school  and  the 
unaffiliated  child.  Whenever  a  holiday  celebration  takes  place,  each 
leader  receives  ten  tickets  for  distribution  among  the  members  of  his 
or  her  group.  Likewise  the  holiday  story  pamphlets,  childrens' 
newspaper,  ceremonial  toys  and  whatever  material  of  instruction  the 
Circle  provides  are  distributed  through  the  leaders.  In  the  same 
way,  if  a  member  wishes  to  join  a  club  or  a  class  in  the  Hebrew  school, 
the  leader  directs  to  the  proper  channel.  The  leader  thus  forms  an 
inexpensive  and  effective  means  of  bringing  the  extension  activities 
of  the  Institute  within  the  reach  of  the  many  children  of  the  neighbor- 
hood who  do  not  attend  Hebrew  schools. 


THE   CENTRAL  JEWISH    INSTITUTE 


209 


Thursday 
Thursday 

5P.M. 
6P.M. 

Auditorium 
Auditorium 

Tuesday 

5P.M. 

Gymnasium 

Sunday 

8P.M. 

Room  I) 

Monday 

4P.M. 

Gymnasium 

Sunday 
Sunday 

1P.M. 
2P.M. 

Room  C 
Room  A 

Sunday 


1P.M. 


Room  B 


THE  CIRCLE  OF  JEWISH  CHILDREN 

Office  open  daily — 4  to  6  P.  M. — Room  A 
Sunday— 10  A.  M— 12  M. 

Senior  Clubs  are  open  to  boys  and  girls  between  the  ages  of  11  and  IS. 
Junior  Clubs  are  open  to  boys  and  girls  beticeen  the  ages  of   7  and  10. 

SCHEDULE  OF  ACTIVITIES 
FESTIVAL  CLUBS 

CHOIB 

Senior  Girls 

Senior  Boys 
DANCING 

Senior  Girls 
DRAMATIC 

Senior  Boys 
DANCING 

Junior 
DRAMATIC 

Senior  Boys 

Senior  Girls 
BEZALLEL  CLUB 

Senior  Boys 
MACCABEAN  SQUAD 

Senior  Girls 

Senior  Boys 
ORCHESTRA 

Senior 
RED  MOGEN  DOVID 

Senior  Girls 
OUTDOOR 

Senior  Boys 
SCRAP  BOOK 

Junior  Boys  aad  Girls 
SEWING 

Senior  Girls 
REPORTERS'  CLUB 

Junior  Boys  and  Girls 
STORY  HOURS 

Boys  and  Girls 

LEADERS'  CONFERENCES 

READING  AND  STUDY 
GAMES 

The  "Circle  Bulletin"  appears  Sunday  9  A.  M. 
(SAMPLE  SCHEDULE  OF  REGULAR  ACTIVITIES  FROM  PROGRAM  OF  1919) 


Monday 
Thursday 

6P.M. 
6P.M. 

Gymnasium 
Gymnasium 

Sunday 

4P.M. 

Room  B 

Wednesday 

4P.M. 

RoomB 

Tuesday 

3.30  P.  M. 

Park 

Tuesday 

4.30  P.  M. 

RoomB 

Thursday 

4P.M. 

RoomB 

Monday 

7P.M. 

RoomC 

Monday             5-6  P.  M. 
Thursday           4-5  P.  M. 
Monday             4-5  P.  M. 
Thursday           5-6  P.  M. 
Open  Daily 
Open  Daily 

Room  C 
RoomC 
Room  A 
Room  A 
RoomC 
RoomD 

210  THEORIES    OF   AMERICANIZATION 

The  League  of  the  Jewish  Youth.  The  plan  of  work  for  the  young 
people  resembles  in  general  outline  the  work  of  the  Circle  of  Jewish 
Children.  However,  the  League  of  the  Jewish  Youth  is  conceived 
of  as  coordinate  in  extent  with  the  Jewish  community  of  the  city  and 
each  branch  is  regarded  as  one  district.  In  the  Circle  the  local 
district  is  the  unit  of  active  work  although  here,  too,  there  is  coordina- 
tion between  various  branches  and  inter-branch  activities.  The 
organization  of  the  older  group  is  replete  with  symbolic  significance 
and  with  historical  reminiscences.  Each  district  is  a  Galil  (^j); 
each  Galil  is  divided  into  Tribes  (0*031?) ;  each  Tribe  into  Households 
(rnnBK'D),  etc.,  and  various  forms  of  initiation  ceremonies  exist  for 
the  Junior,  Intermediate  and  Senior  members.  Naturally  much  more 
initiative  is  permitted  the  young  people  and  to  a  greater  extent 
they  conduct  their  own  activities.  In  addition  to  holiday  celebra- 
tions, literature,  training  groups  for  'organizers'  and  forum  for 
discussion  of  Jewish  and  civic  questions,  the  young  people  are  given 
opportunity  to  participate  in  communal  efforts,  both  Jewish  and  civic. 
Thus  the  League  has  been  utilized  in  drives  for  Federation  members, 
Kehillah,  Relief,  Restoration  Funds,  Liberty  Loan  and  Red  Cross. 
While  dealing  mainly  with  large  numbers,  the  organization  is  so 
planned  that  through  a  series  of  concentric  groups  of  varying  sizes, 
organizers'  councils,  local  councils,  city  council,  inner  council,  etc., 
the  elders,  as  the  directors  and  supervisors  are  called,  can  come  in 
close  personal  contact  with  the  leading  spirits  among  the  young 
people  to  guide  them  and  select  for  more  intensive  work  those  capable 
of  leadership. 

The  Parents'  Association.  No  plan  of  education  is  complete  which 
does  not  include  the  parent.  Especially  is  this  true  in  Jewish  life, 
where  the  family  is  the  keystone  of  the  whole  communal  structure. 
The  problem  of  bridging  the  gap  between  the  generations  cannot  be 
solved  without  the  parent.  Not  only  is  it  necessary  to  arouse 
interest  in  the  problem  of  Jewish  education.  Of  equal  importance  is 
the  problem  of  bringing  the  parents  nearer  to  their  children  through 
teaching  them  the  language  of  the  new  land  and  interesting  them  in 
the  general  problems  of  the  civic  community.  To  deal  with  this 
aspect  of  the  work  a  Parents'  Association  has  been  formed  which 


THE   CENTRAL  JEWISH    INSTITUTE 

LEAGUE  OF  THE  JEWISH  YOUTH 

Office  open  daily  (except  Friday)  from  8  to  10  P.  M. — Room  C. 

Senior  activities  are  open  to  members  between  the  ages  of  IS  and  21, 
Intermediate  activities  are  open  to  members  between  the  ages  of  15  and  17. 
Junior  activities  are  open  to  members  between  the  ages  of  IS  and  16. 


211 


SCHEDULE  OF  ACTIVITIES 


FESTIVAL  CLUBS 

CHOIB 

Senior 

Intermediate 
DRAMATIC 

Senior 

Intermediate 

Junior 
ORCHESTRA 


POSTER  CLUB 

ENTERTAINMENT  AND 
DANCE 

ORGANIZERS'  TRAINING 
GROUPS 

Junior  Girls 
Junior  Boys 
Intermediate  Boys 
Intermediate  Girls 
Senior 


Thursday 
Thursday 

8.80  to  10  P.  M. 
7.30  to  8.30  P.  M. 

Room  B 
RoomB 

Sunday 
Sunday 
Sunday 
Sunday 

8  to  10  P.  M. 
8  to  10  P.  M. 
4  to  6  P.  M. 
8  to  10  P.  M. 

Room  D 
Room  A 
Room  D 
RoomB 

Wednesday 

7.30  to  9  P.  M. 

Gymnasium 

Wednesday 

8  to  10  P.  M. 

RoomB 

Alternate  Sun.  2.30  P.  M.  Gymnasium 


Alternate  Wed.  7  to  8.30  P.  M.  Room  E 

Tuesday             7  to  8.30  P.  M.  Room  E 

Tuesday             8  to  9.30  P.  M.  Room  E 

Wednesday        8  to  9:30  P.  M.  Room  F 

Alternate  Wed.  7  to  8.30  P.  M.  Room  E 


LOCAL  CABINET  MEETING    Saturday  8  to  10  P.  M.  Room  E 

CITY  CABINET  MEETING       2d  Saturday      8  to  10  P  M.  Room  E 

EDITORIAL  BOARD— HED  HA-GALIL  1st  &  3d  Sat.  8  to  10  P.  M.  Room  E 
ELDERS'  TRAINING  GROUP   1st  and  3d  Sun.  8  to  10  P.  M.  Social  Rooms 

JEWISH  FORUM  Friday  Evening  Social  Rooms 

"Bed  Ha-Galil" — Bulletin  of  the  L.  J.  Y.  A.  appears  on  the  15th  of  each  month. 
(SAMPLE  SCHEDULE  OF  REGULAR  ACTIVITIES  FROM  PROGRAM  OF  1918) 


212  THEORIES   OF  AMERICANIZATION 

begins  with  the  natural  interest  that  the  parents  have  in  the  work  of 
their  children  and  leads  out  into  Jewish  communal  and  general  civic 
activities  of  concern  to  the  parents  themselves.  Monthly  meetings 
are  held  for  the  discussion  of  the  problems  of  the  school  and  the 
questions  of  wider  Jewish  and  civic  interest.  On  bi-weekly  occasions, 
Sunday  afternoons,  the  parents  of  the  children  of  a  selected  class 
observe  model  lessons  and  discuss  the  work  of  their  own  children  with 
teachers  and  principal.  These  meetings  have  their  social  aspect  and 
the  parents  act  as  hosts.  On  these  as  well  as  on  other  social  occasions 
the  mothers  contribute  cakes  of  their  own  baking,  mix  the  punch,  etc. 
A  cooking  class  is  led  by  one  of  the  parents  who  has  a  good  knowledge 
of  Jewish  cooking  and  understands  something  of  the  elements  of 
dietetics  and  correct  form  of  table  service.  A  study  circle  in  Jewish 
subjects  is  carried  on  weekly.  Furthermore,  through  the  Associa- 
tion the  parents  are  brought  in  contact  with  the  general  activities 
such  as  classes  for  English  to  foreigners,  public  lectures,  Red  Cross 
work,  etc.  Pains  are  taken  to  make  the  parents  feel  at  home  in  the 
building.  A  room  has  been  appropriately  furnished  as  the  meeting 
place  for  the  parents  and  a  "social  evening"  is  conducted  once  a 
week,  the  parents  taking  turns  in  acting  as  hosts.  All  of  the  activ- 
ities are  conducted  by  the  Parents'  Association,  the  institution  assist- 
ing with  the  plans  and  subsidizing  certain  of  the  activities.  These 
activities  generally  involve  only  comparatively  small  numbers.  The 
large  numbers  of  parents  are  reached  through  activities  centering 
about  the  Holy  Days  and  Festivals.  The  parents  conduct  their  own 
services  on  the  High  Holy  Days  in  the  auditorium  of  the  Institute. 
In  addition  every  Festival  is  celebrated  through  some  appropriate 
entertainment  as  in  the  case  of  the  children's  and  youths'  organi- 
zations. 

Each  age,  then,  has  its  separate  organization,  its  festival  celebra- 
tions and  its  special  reading  and  meeting  room.  All  the  work,  how- 
ever, is  connected  by  the  organic  purpose  of  the  Institute,  and  there 
are  occasions  when  the  different  ages  are  brought  together.  The 
Institute  regards  the  family,  not  the  individual,  as  the  pupil.  The 
attempt  always  is  to  reach  the  several  members  of  the  same  family 
rather  than  to  scatter  energy  amongst  single  individuals.  One  of  the 


THE   CENTRAL  JEWISH    INSTITUTE  213 

main  principles  upon  which  the  Central  Jewish  Institute  bases  its 
work  is  the  belief  that  only  by  dealing  with  the  family  as  a  whole 
can  the  integrity  of  Jewish  life  be  preserved. 

Jewish  Holiday  Celebrations.  The  Festival  celebrations  may  be 
regarded  as  the  nucleus  of  the  extension  curriculum.  The  work  of 
many  of  the  clubs  in  the  Circle  and  in  the  League  consists  of  preparing 
for  them  and  much  of  the  work  of  the  Parents'  Association  centers 
about  the  Jewish  holidays. 

The  holiday  celebration  is  conceived  of  as  a  unit,  but  separate 
entertainments  are  conducted  for  children,  the  young  people,  and 
parents.  In  the  entertainment  of  the  Circle  of  Jewish  Children,  two 
performances  are  generally  given,  one  for  the  older  children  and  one 
for  the  younger.  In  these  entertainments,  the  children  who  attend 
the  School  and  the  members  of  the  Circle  are  brought  together. 
Every  number  on  the  program  is  designed  to  bring  out  some  signifi- 
cant aspect  of  the  holiday.  The  ceremonial,  historical  and  ethical 
significances  are  each  treated  either  directly  or  indirectly.  The  play, 
tableau,  illustrated  lecture,  and  song  are  utilized.  Usually  the  entire 
assembly  is  taught  a  holiday  song,  and  pamphlets  telling  the  story 
of  the  holidays  are  distributed.  While  most  of  the  program  is  rend- 
ered in  English,  some  Yiddish  and  Hebrew  is  introduced,  especially 
in  songs  and  in  recitations. 

The  holiday  program  of  the  League  is  similar  in  scope.  The  chair- 
man is  generally  the  president  of  the  branch  of  the  League  of  the 
Jewish  Youth.  Addresses  both  by  one  of  the  young  people  and  by  an 
'elder'  of  the  community  are  a  feature. 

The  Parents'  Evening  is  made  up  of  selections  from  the  program 
of  the  League  and  the  Circle.  In  addition,  a  parent  and  a  member 
from  the  community  at  large  deliver  addresses  on  some  timely  topic  or 
Jewish  community  problem.  One  of  these  addresses  is  always  in 
Yiddish.  An  officer  of  the  Parents'  Association  acts  as  chairman, 
and  the  parents  themselves  act  as  ushers. 

In  the  entertainments  for  the  young  people  and  the  parents  pro- 
grams are  generally  printed  which,  in  addition  to  giving  the  arrange- 
ment of  the  program,  also  bear  some  educational  message.  The 
history  or  significance  of  the  holiday  is  brought  out  and  correlated  with 
some  event  of  civic  or  current  Jewish  interest. 


214  THEORIES    OF   AMERICANIZATION 

CIRCLE  OF  JEWISH  CHILDREN  ENTERTAINMENTS 

SUNDAY,  DECEMBEK  1,  AT  10  A.  M.,  for  JUNIORS 
MONDAY,  DECEMBER  C,  AT  4  p.  M.,  for  SENIORS 


PROGRAM 

1.  AMERICA  '.  Audience 

1.  CHAIRMAN'S  REMARKS Miss  Leah  Konowitz,  Chairman 

8.  LIGHTING  OP  THE  CANDLES A  member  of  the  T.  T.  Choir 

Haneros  Halalu Talmud  Torah  Choir 

Mo'oz  Tzur 

4.  RECITATION:    Judas  Maccabeus A  member  of  the  Junior  Dramatic  Club 

5.  CHANUKAB  DANCE Dancing  Class 

6.  RECITATION:    Ten  little  boys Jr.  Dramatic  Club 

7.  MASS  SINGING Choir  and  Audience 

Circle  Song 
Auf'n  Pripitchik 

8.  A  CHANUKAH  STORY Mr.  Mordecai  M.  Soties 

9.  THE  MOTHHR  OF  MARTYRS  (A  one  act  play) Sr.  Dramatic  Club 

10.     HATIK  VAH     Audience 

(FROM  CHANUKAH  PROGRAM  1918) 


PARENTS'  ENTERTAINMENT 
SATURDAY,  May  18th,  1918,  at  8.30  P.  M. 


PROGRAM 

1.  THE  STAR-SPANGLED  BANNER Audience 

2.  INTRODUCTORY  REMARKS Dr.  Simon  Tannenbaum,  Chairman 

3.  "Doe  LIED  VON  BROT" Choir,  The  Circle  of  Jewish  Children 

4.  RECITATION:    El  Hatsipor — Bialik Milton  Jacobs 

5.  SHEVUOTH  DANCE Junior  Dancing  Club 

6.  ADDRESS:    The  League  of  the  Jewish  Youth Emanuel  Hirshberger 

7.  "PAGEANT  OF  OLD  ISRAEL" Choir,  The  Circle  of  Jewish  Children 

8.  RECITATION:    "Zamd  und  Shtern" Adolph  Tannenbaum 

9.  PLAY:    "Ruth" Dramatic  Club,  The  League  of  the  Jewish  Youth 

10.  HATIKVAH Audience 

(FROM  SHEVUOTH  PROGRAM  1918) 


THE   CENTRAL  JEWISH    INSTITUTE  215 

THE  LEAGUE  OF  THE  JEWISH  YOUTH 
YORKVILLE  GALIL 


PROGRAM 

1.    THE  NATIONAL  ANTHEMS  OF  THE  ALLIES C.  J.I,  Choir 

America,  Rule  Brittania,  The  Marseillaise,  Hatikvah. 
1.     RECITATION:     "Peace"  (Isaiah,  Ch.  II,  vs.  2-5) Rose  Goldman 

3.  SHOLOM  ALEICHEM C.  J.  I.  Choir 

4.  CHAIRMAN'S  REMARKS George  Hyman,  President  Yorkvitte  Galil  L.  J.  Y. 

5.  LIGHTING  OF  THE  CHANUKAH  LIGHTS Simon  Yudelowsky 

Haneros  Halalu 

Mo'oz  Tzur C.  /.    /.   Choir 

6.  TABLEAUX 

a.  Mattathias 

RECITATION Rose  Goldman 

"ALL  WHO  ARE  FAITHFUL  FOLLOW  ME" 
Cast  of  Characters,  etc. 

b.  Battle  of  Beth  Horon 

RECITATION Emanuel  Hirshberger 

"LET  OUR  WATCHWORD  BE  THE  HELP  OF  GOD" 
Cast  of  Characters,  etc. 

7.  VOCAL  SOLO Miss  Jennie  Friedman 

"Oi  Ihr  Kleineke  Lichtelach" 

Words  by  Morris  Rosenfeld;   Music  by  Miss  Sadie  Cheifetz 

8.  THE  DANCE  OF  THE  CANDLES Downtown  Galil,  L.  J.  Y.  A. 

9.  CHANUKAH,  Or  CHANUKAH C.  J.  I.  Choir 

10.  HANNAH  (A  one  act  play) Dramatic  Club,  C.  J.  I. 

Place:    Throne  Room  in  Palace  of  Antiochus,  King  of  Syria. 
Time:    In  the  Days  of  the  Maccabees. 
Cast  of  Characters,  etc. 

11.  MASS  SINGING C.J.I.  Choir,  Audience 

"HEAR  THE  VOICE  OF  ISRAEL'S  ELDERS" 

12.  ADDRESS Mr.  Isaac  B.  Berkson 

IS.     HATIKVAH     Audience 

(FROM  CHANUKAH  FESTIVAL  1918) 


216  THEORIES    OF   AMERICANIZATION 

American  Holiday  Celebrations.  Just  as  the  work  in  the  Talmud 
Torah  is  correlated  with  reference  to  Jewish  life  in  America,  so,  too, 
the  festival  celebrations  are  correlated  with  American  ideas  and  with 
current  events.  In  addition  to  these  references  to  American  life  in 
distinctly  Jewish  festivals,  an  attempt  has  been  made  to  celebrate 
the  American  holidays  as  the  Jewish  holidays  are  celebrated,  i.e., 
with  the  purpose  of  bringing  out  their  spiritual  significance. 

The  first  of  these  was  the  celebration  of  "Lincoln  Evening"  in  1918, 
the  program  of  which  is  presented  here.  American  folk  songs  were 
utilized  in  the  same  way  that  the  Jewish  folk  songs  are  used  in  the 
Jewish  Festivals.  The  address  of  the  chairman  dealt  with  the  grow- 
ing Americanism,  as  illustrated  in  quotations  from  significant  Ameri- 
can documents.  The  concluding  number  was  an  address  on  Lincoln 
based  on  Professor  Schechter's  masterly  essay,  interpreting  the 
character  of  Lincoln  with  added  richness  through  the  Jewish  apper- 
ceptive  mass.  As  an  American  holiday  celebration  the  program 
presented  undoubtedly  valuable  elements,  in  its  dignity  and  serious- 
ness of  the  conception  of  Americanism. 

This  type  of  program  illustrates  a  principle  not  sufficiently  grasped 
by  the  current  notions  in  Americanization  programs.  The  American 
holidays  can  assume  untold  meaning  to  the  immigrant  when  ap- 
proached from  his  own  apperceptive  mass  and  through  the  ideals 
with  which  he  is  acquainted  in  his  own  culture.  Such  celebrations 
as  these  give  the  immigrant  a  real  kinship  with  the  ideals  underlying 
American  life.  In  a  similar  manner,  Washington's  birthday, 
Thanksgiving,  and  Columbus  Day  have  been  celebrated  with  ap- 
propriate programs. 


3.     SOCIAL,  Civic  AND  GENERAL  ACTIVITIES 

In  addition  to  the  specific  purpose  of  conducting  definitely  Jewish 
educational  activities  the  Central  Jewish  Institute  also  serves  as  a 
general  social  centre,  welcoming  every  activity  which  promotes  the 
physical,  social  and  civic  well-being  of  the  community.  The  types 
of  work  carried  on  under  this  head  of  general  activities  are  varied  and 
resemble  the  recreational  and  educational  activities  usually  carried 


THE   CENTRAL  JEWISH    INSTITUTE  217 

iti  Americanism  anb  toljat  fcoes  it  bemanb  of  us? 

Can  it  demand  that  we  deny  who  we  are?  Is  it  possible  that  it  should  ask  us  to 
become  estranged  from  our  fathers  and  mothers?  Shall  it  ask  us  to  forget  the  People 
from  whom  we  are  sprung? 

No!  For  Americanism  is  something  positive,  not  negative;  it  demands  a  loyalty, 
not  a  disloyalty. 

America  demands  that  we  give  to  it  what  is  finest  and  most  profound  in  our  Peo- 
ple's life.  What  these  things  are  we  have  sought  to  inscribe  on  the  emblem  of  our 
League.  "Torah,  Avodah,  Gemiluth  Hasodim,"  symbolize  for  us  all  of  those  spiritual 
ideals  and  that  spirit  of  service  which  we  have  struggled  to  develop  throughout  the 
forty  centuries  of  our  history, 

But  in  no  less  degree  does  America  demand  that  we  also  take  from  it  what  is  finest 
and  most  profound  in  its  own  life.  And  we  are  gathered  here  tonight  for  just  this 
purpose — to  gain  a  little  deeper  insight  into  the  great  things  for  which  America 
stands. 

This,  then,  is  the  confession  of  faith  of  our  League  of  the  Jewish  Youth. 

Not  by  negation  and  neglect  of  our  Jewish  souls,  but  by  contributing  what  is  finest 
in  us  to  America  and  by  taking  the  finest  in  America  unto  ourselves  can  we  become 
loyal  to  America. 

PROGRAM 

1.  STAR  SPANGLED  BANNER Audience 

2.  OUR  CONCEPTION  OF  AMERICANISM 

The  League  of  the  Jewish  Youth,  recited  by Rose  Goldman 

3.  INTRODUCTION  OF  THE  CHAIRMAN.  ..  .Daniel  Cogan,  Pres.  Inter-Club  Council 

4.  INTRODUCTORT  ADDRESS Abraham  A.  Silberberg 

Chairman,  Social  Activities  Committee 

5.  VIOLIN  SOLO  CONCERTO  No.  2 Leonard 

PHILIP  GELLER 

6.  RECITATION:    "The  Jesters  Recantation" Mr.  Philip  Adler 

(  Swanee  River 

7.  VOCAL  SOLO  \  Old  Black  Joe Miss  Rose  Rabbach 

(  Comin'  Thru  the  Rye 

8.  ADDRESS:    "A  Jewish  Conception  of  Lincoln" Rabbi  Jacob  Kohn 

9.  HATIKVAH     Audience 

Miss  SADIE  CHEIFETZ  AT  THE  PIANO 

10.    DANCING 

(FROM  LINCOLN  PROGRAM  1918) 


218  THEORIES    OF   AMERICANIZATION 

This  little  hut  was  the  cradle  of  one  of  the  great  sons  of  men,  a  man  of  singular,  delightful,  vital 
genius,  who  presently  emerged  upon1  the  great  stage  of  the  nation's  history,  gaunt,  shy,  ungainly,  but 
dominant  and  majestic;  a  natural  ruler  of  men,  himself  inevitably  the  central  figure  of  the  great  plot. 

No  man  can  explain  this,  but  every  man  can  see  how  it  demonstrates  the  vigor  of  democracy,  where 
every  door  is  open,  in  every  hamlet  and  country  side,  in  city  and  wilderness  alike,  for  the  ruler  to  emerge 
when  he  will  and  claim  his  leadership  in  the  free  life.  Such  are  the  authentic  proofs  of  the  validity  of 
democracy. 

Lincoln,  like  the  rest  of  us,  was  put  through  the  discipline  of  the  world — a  very  rough  and  exacting 
discipline  for  every  man  who  would  know  what  he  is  about  in  the  midst  of  the  world's  affairs;  but  his 
spirit  got  only  its  schooling  there.  It  did  not  derive  its  character  from  the  experiences  which  brought 
it  to  its  full  revelation.  The  test  of  every  American  must  always  be,  not  where  he  is,  but  what  he  is. 
That  also,  is  the  essence  of  democracy,  and  is  the  moral  of  which  this  place  is  most  gravely  expressive. 
— PRESIDENT  WOODROW  WILSON'S  address  at  Hodgenville,  Ky.,  accepting  birthplace  of  Abraham 
Lincoln  as  a  gift  to  the  Nation. 

1787 

We,  the  People  of  the  United  States,  in  order  to  form  a  more  perfect  union,  establish  justice,  in- 
sure domestic  tranquility,  provide  for  the  common  defense,  promote  the  general  welfare,  and  secure  the 
blessings  of  liberty  for  ourselves  and  our  posterity,  do  ordain  and  establish  this  constitution  for  the 
United  States  of  A  merica. 

PREAMBLE  OF  THE  CONSTITUTION  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 

1823 

The  occasion  has  been  judged  proper  for  asserting,  as  a  principle  in  whtch  the  rights  and  interests 
of  the  United  States  are  involved,  that  the  American  continents  by  the  free  and  independent  condition 
which  they  have  assumed  and  maintain,  are  henceforth,  not  to  be  considered  as  subjects  for  future 
colonization  by  any  European  powers. 

We  owe  it,  therefore,  to  candor  and  to  the  amicable  relations  existing  between  the  United  States  and 
those  Powers,  to  declare,  that  we  should  consider  any  attempt  on  their  part  to  extend  their  system  of 
government  to  any  portion  of  this  hemisphere,  as  dangerous  to  our  peace  and  safety. 

JAMES  MONROE:   Message  to  Congress,  December  2,  1823. 

1858 

"A  house  divided  against  itself  cannot  stand."  I  believe  this  government  cannot  endure  perma- 
nently half  slave  and  half  free.  1  do  not  expect  the  Union  to  be  dissolved.  I  do  not  expect  the  house 
to  fall — but  I  do  expect  it  will  cease  to  be  divided.  It  will  become  all  one  thing,  or  all  the  other. 

ABRAHAM  LINCOLN:   From  speech  delivered  at  Springfield,  III.,  June  16,  1858. 

1917 

We  are  glad,  now  that  we  see  the  facts  with  no  veil  of  fake  pretense  about  them,  to  fight  thus  for  the 
ultimate  peace  of  the  world  and  for  the  liberation  of  its  peoples,  the  German  people  included:  for  the 
rights  of  nations,  great  and  small,  and  the  privilege  of  men  everywhere,  to  choose  their  way  of  life  and 
obedience.  The  world  must  be  made  safe  for  democracy.  Its  peace  must  be  planted  upon  the  tested 
foundations  of  political  liberty.  We  have  no  selfish  ends  to  serve.  We  desire  no  conquest,  no  do- 
minion. We  seek  no  indemnities  for  ourselves,  no  material  compensation  for  the  sacrifices  we  shall 
freely  make.  We  are  but  one  of  champions  of  the  rights  of  mankind.  We  shall  be  satisfied  when 
these  rights  have  been  made  secure  as  the  faith  and  the  freedom  of  nations  can  make  them. 

WOODROW  WILSON:   Address  delivered  at  a  Joint  Session  of  the  Two  Houses  of  Congress, 
April  21,  1017. 

(FROM  LINCOLN  PROGRAM,  1918) 


THE   CENTRAL   JEWISH    INSTITUTE  219 

on  by  social  settlements.     Their  general  character  and  scope  are  well 
known  and  need  perhaps  no  more  than  to  be  mentioned. 

Club  Work.  As  in  most  social  settlements,  social  and  literary 
clubs  for  young  people  are  conducted.  These  have  their  meetings, 
dances,  debates,  entertainments,  athletic  affairs,  etc.  A  G.  O. 
(general  organization)  exists  in  which  the  various  clubs  have  repre- 
sentatives and  in  which  are  discussed  and  arranged  matters  of  inter- 
est to  all  the  clubs.  The  Institute  puts  whatever  facilities  it  has  at  the 
disposal  of  the  clubs  and  directs  them  in  their  work  by  suggesting 
programs  and  activities;  but  it  in  no  way  interferes  with  the  autono- 
mous organization.  These  clubs  cooperate  with  the  League  of  the 
Jewish  Youth  and  are  a  binding  link  between  the  Jewish  extension 
work  described  above  and  the  general  activities. 

Jewish  Societies.  The  building  is  used  as  a  meeting  place  also  by  a 
number  of  Jewish  organizations,  not  necessarily  of  the  neighborhood, 
which  are  interested  in  various  phases  of  Jewish  communal  life  or  in 
Jewish  movements.  These  include  clubs  and  societies  interested  in 
Jewish  questions  from  the  viewpoint  of  study,  such  as  Zionist  socie- 
ties and  also  adult  organizations  for  various  philanthropic  and 
communal  purposes. 

Civic  Education.  The  Institute  cooperates  with  civic  agencies  in 
bringing  to  the  neighborhood  educational  activities  of  various 
nature.  Under  this  head  the  Board  of  Education  conducts  public 
lectures  and  a  class  in  English  to  foreigners.  Lectures  in  citizenship, 
in  problems  of  sanitation,  sex-hygiene  and  the  like  are  given  from  time 
to  time  under  the  auspices  of  various  societies.  A  civic  forum  is 
conducted  on  Sunday  afternoons.  In  all  of  the  civic  educational 
activities  the  non-Jews  of  the  neighborhood  are  invited  and  attend. 

Occasional  Events.  Besides  housing  these  regular  activities,  the 
building  is  used  for  a  great  many  occasional  events  of  many  sorts, 
such  as  concerts,  recitals,  dances,  banquets,  conventions,  and  cele- 
brations representing  a  host  of  social  and  educational  activities. 


220  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

Summarizing,  we  may  say  that  the  work  of  the  Central  Jewish 
Institute  can  be  thought  of  as  being  included  within  three  concentric 
circles.  The  inner  one,  which  forms  the  nucleus,  deals  with  intensive 
Jewish  education  and  is  based  upon  the  work  of  the  Talmud  Torahs. 
The  outer  one  deals  with  the  general  civic,  social  and  educational 
activities  and  follows  closely  the  work  of  recreational  and  social 
settlements.  The  connecting  circle,  including  the  extension  activi- 
ties, is  a  phase  which  has  no  embodiment  in  a  separate  institution 
but  rises  out  of  the  necessity  of  relating  the  other  two  phases;  it 
is  a  consequence  of  looking  upon  the  task  as  a  problem  of  adjust- 
ment. 

The  importance  of  the  function  of  the  series  of  activities  included  in 
extension  work,  the  Circle  of  Jewish  Children,  the  League  of  the  Jew- 
ish Youth  and  the  Parents'  Association,  is  as  yet  little  understood.  It 
is  the  linking  force  between  the  specific  Jewish  purpose  and  the  gen- 
eral social  activities.  From  the  Jewish  point  of  view  it  is  the  means 
of  interesting  those  whose  Jewish  interests  are  lukewarm  or  for  whom 
intensive  class  work  is  not  adapted.  It  is  the  agency  through  which 
those  who  have  little  contact  with  Jewish  life  are  brought  together 
with  those  who  have  more  intimate  knowledge.  The  children  of  the 
Circle  are  brought  into  contact  with  the  children  of  the  Talmud  Torah 
and  the  regular  members  of  the  League,  with  the  more  active  leaders 
and  organizers.  On  the  other  hand,  those  who  come  to  the  Institute 
primarily  through  their  Jewish  interests  are  brought  into  contact 
with  wider  community  interests  and  civic  affairs.  The  extension 
work  thus  forms  a  clearing  house  for  the  interchange  and  adjustment 
of  the  various  forces.  It  is  in  the  further  development  of  the  exten- 
sion activities  where  the  idea  of  adjustment  is  emphasized  that  we  can 
expect  to  find  the  Jewish  Community  Center  making  its  characteris- 
tic contribution. 

Few  of  the  many  elements  that  have  gone  to  make  up  the  work  of 
the  Institute  are  new.  But  the  similarity  to  other  institutions  in 
certain  phases  should  not  be  permitted  to  obscure  what  is  essential 
to  the  plan.  The  many  activities  are  not  a  combination  merely; 
the  work  has  been  unified  by  the  main  purpose.  The  attitude  is 
distinctly  not  that  of  many  social  settlements  and  centers  which 


THE   CENTRAL  JEWISH    INSTITUTE  221 

disclaim  any  purpose  of  their  own,  but  are  willing  to  provide  whatso- 
ever activities  the  neighborhood  requests.  The  Institute  is  glad  to 
offer  its  facilities;  but  in  addition  it  has  its  own  central  idea  which 
forms  the  criterion  by  which  to  decide  upon  what  activities  its  money 
and  energies  should  be  expended.  The  basic  thought  of  the  institu- 
tion, to  preserve  Jewish  life  in  harmony  with  American  conditions, 
controls  the  general  scope  of  work  and  affects  the  manner  of  treating 
subjects  and  activities.  Nor  is  the  Institute  to  be  looked  upon  as  a 
compromise  between  Talmud  Torah  and  social  center.  The  word 
'compromise'  suggests  a  middle  course  not  wholly  satisfactory  to 
either  side.  The  aim  of  the  Jewish  Community  Center  must  be 
synthetic,  its  Talmud  Torah  should  maintain  the  highest  standard 
possible  without  relinquishing  the  other  elements  demanded  by  the 
new  C9nditions.  Without  this  central  emphasis  upon  the  distinct 
aim  of  preserving  Jewish  life  the  Central  Jewish  Institute  could  not 
serve  as  an  illustration  of  the  type  of  educational  agency  through 
which  the  'Community'  theory  can  become  effective. 

The  'Community'  theory  of  adjustment,  then,  means  concretely 
that  Jewish  life  in  this  country  must  depend  mainly  upon  the  exist- 
ence of  a  sufficiently  large  number  of  Jewish  centers  built  in  the  main 
along  the  lines  of  the  modernized  Talmud  Torah  suggested  in  the  plan 
of  the  Central  Jewish  Institute.  Jewish  life,  of  course,  will  contain 
many  more  elements.  A  certain  amount  of  local  contiguity  will  be 
basic  to  any  community  spirit.  The  Jewish  family,  the  synagogue 
and  philanthropic  institutions  must  remain  a  part  of  any  system  of 
Jewish  life  developed  in  this  country.  Theories  will  differ  as  to  what 
is  regarded  in  them  as  most  effective  in  preserving  and  fostering  a 
significant  Jewish  life.  Those  who  regard  Judaism  as  a  religion 
merely  would  logically  make  the  synagogue  or  temple  the  central 
agency.  The  nationalists  and  those  who  emphasize  the  racial 
distinctiveness  of  the  Jew  would  naturally  tend  to  favor  schemes 
which  allot  definite  territories  and  provide  for  some  measure  of  politi- 
cal autonomy.  The  'Community'  theory,  emphasizing  the  cultural 
and  spiritual  heritage  of  the  group,  makes  the  school  central,  and  in 
the  conditions  confronting  us  in  American  life  it  would  be  necessary  to 
add  that  the  school  must  complement,  not  supplant  the  public  school. 


222  THEORIES   OF    AMERICANIZATION 

Our  discussion  began  with  a  theoretical  argument  based  upon  the 
demands  of  a  democratic  mode  of  thought.  What  place  has  the  Jewish 
group  in  our  democracy?  May  it  retain  its  identity  or  must  it  fuse 
entirely  with  the  total  group?  Second,  if  it  may  retain  its  identity, 
under  what  limitations  and  through  what  agencies  may  it  do  so  ?  We 
may  now  face  about  and  ask  these  questions  in  a  more  concrete  form. 
Shall  ethnic  communities  be  permitted  to  carry  on  such  activities  as  are 
implied  in  the  lines  of  work  conducted  at  the  Central  Jewish  Institute? 
Are  such  activities  in  accord  with  the  aims  of  democratic  America? 
Perhaps  few  will  give  negative  answers  to  these  questions.  On  the 
other  hand,  witt  such  activities  be  adequate  to  prevent  the  ethnic  group 
from  disintegrating?  Will  they  be  adequate  to  conserve  for  the  indi- 
vidual member  of  the  ethnic  group  and  through  him  for  the  community 
at  large  the  valuable  elements  in  the  group  heritage? 

The  answer  of  the  writer  is  implied  in  the  recommendation.  But, 
undoubtedly,  the  facts  are  not  at  hand  which  may  permit  us  to  make 
a  scientific  prediction.  The  Jews  have  had  the  longest  experience  in 
preserving  a  group  heritage,  though  separated  from  their  land. 
Yet  the  same  conditions,  psychological  as  well  as  material,  have  never 
confronted  them.  It  is  proposed  that  they  live  with  their  neighbors, 
not  in  ghettoes;  democracy  is  spoken  of;  there  is  a  sound  desire  to 
make  a  harmonious  adjustment;  the  concept  of  cultural  nationality 
has  been  developed;  the  homeland  will  be  rebuilt;  new  events  stress 
the  importance  of  an  international  outlook — the  combination  of  new 
circumstances  and  new  ideas  must  make  him  pause  who  would  wish 
to  prophecy. 

However,  one  thing  seems  clear:  only  the  method  proposed — in  its 
main  aspects — can  serve  in  the  conditions  confronting  us  in  America 
as  a  satisfactory  solution  for  the  development  of  a  sound  and  normal 
Jewish  life.  Otherwise  Jewish  life  in  America  must  disintegrate; 
or  become  irrelevant,  as  in  the  petrified  ceremonialism  of  American 
orthodoxy  or  the  disembodied  phrases  of  American  Reform;  or  be- 
come narrowed  and  inward,  as  in  the  parochial  outlook  of  the  Mizrachi 
or  the  racial  nationalism  of  the  Poale  Zion.  Of  irrelevancies,  sup- 
pressions, and  abnormalities  Jewish  life  has  had  enough  in  the  last 
two  thousand  years  of  ghetto.  If  it  is  impossible  to  develop  in 
America  a  sound  Jewish  life  which  reckons  with  the  environment, 


THE  CENTRAL  JEWISH    INSTITUTE  223 

it  would  be  best  to  allow  the  forces  of  assimilation  to  run  their  course. 
We  would  arrive,  then,  at  the  position  of  rvtan  ^WQ  (those  who 
negate  the  diaspora)  who  look  to  Palestine  alone  for  the  continuance  of 
Jewish  life.  All  energies  would  need  to  be  turned  to  the  upbuilding 
of  a  sound,  healthy  and  significant  Jewish  life  in  Palestine.  Under 
such  conditions  Jewish  life  might  indeed  be  preserved;  but  it  would  be 
deprived  of  its  international  organization  fraught  with  so  much  signifi- 
cance and  might  even  tend  to  be  narrowed  again  to  the  limitations 
of  a  nationalistic  cult.  In  this  disintegration  of  Jewi  sh  life  in  the 
diaspora  not  only  the  Jews,  but  America  too,  in  common  with  other 
countries,  would  undoubtedly  sustain  a  cultural  and  spiritual  loss. 

A  solution  of  our  problem  harmonious  with  basic  principles  be- 
comes imperative,  not  alone  because  we  love  our  people  and  cherish 
its  traditions,  not  alone  because  we  recognize  our  duty  to  America 
and  appreciate  its  great  cultural  possibilities,  but  in  a  profoundly 
moral  sense  also  because  we  are  beginning  to  grasp  the  significance 
that  a  proper  adjustment  of  the  foreign  ethnic  groups  in  our  midst 
may  have  for  the  relations  of  one  nation  to  another,  in  raising  the 
basis  of  national  life  from  a  materialistic  to  a  spiritual  plane,  in 
transmuting  its  very  essence  from  the  gross  metal  of  economic  im- 
perialism to  the  pure  gold  of  cultural  self-determination.  And  in 
this  development  of  a  new  conception  of  nationality,  with  its  impli- 
cations for  the  New  World  order,  there  is  a  part  to  play,  not  only 
for  the  Jewish  group,  be  it  understood,  but  for  every  ethnic  com- 
munity in  America  which  has  transcended  the  limitations  of  national 
fetichism  and  has  caught  the  vision  of  a  universal  humane  ideal. 


SELECTED  REFERENCES 

ABAC  HA'AM.        Al  Prashat  D'rahim. 
ADDAMS.  JANE.        Democracy  and  Social  Ethics. 

.        Newer  Ideals  of  Peace. 

ALEXANDER,  HARTLEY  B.        Liberty  and  Democracy. 

ANTIN,  MARY        The  Promised  Land. 

ATHEARN,  A.  S.        Religious  Education  and  American  Democracy. 

BERKSON,  I.  B.        "The  Community  School  Center,"  The  Jewish  Teacher.  Dec.  1917. 

BINADT,  PIERRE        Les  droits  et  les  devoirs  de  I'etat  en  matiere  d'enseignment. 

BOAS,  FRANZ.        Changes  in  Bodily  Form  of  Descendants  of  Immigrants. 

.      The  Mind  of  Primitive  Man. 

BOUQUILLON,  REV.  T.        Education,  to  Whom  Doe»  it  Belong? 

BRIDGES,  HORACE  J.        On  Becoming  an  American. 

BURNS,  C.  S.  C.         The  Condition  of  Catholic  Education  in  the  United  States. 

CARPENTER,  EDWARD.         Towards  Democracy. 

CONWAT,  REV.  S.  G.         The  State  Last. 

CRAFTS,  W.  F.        Bible  in  School  Plans  in  Many  Lands. 

CROLT,  HERBERT.        Progressive  Democracy. 

CUBBEHLET,  EixwooD  P.         Changing  Conceptions  in  Education. 

DEWET,  JOHN        The  Influence  of  Darwin  on  Philosophy,  and  other  essays. 

.        Democracy  and  Education. 

.     "Nationalizing  Education"  Proceedings  of  N.  E.  A.,  1916. 

DRACHSLER,  JULIUS.        Democracy  and  Assimilation. 

.         Intermarriage  in  New  York  City. 

DUSHKIN,  A.  M.         Jewish  Education  in  New  York  City. 

FENELON,  JOHN  F.        "The  State,"  Catholic  Education  Association  ButtetinJNov.  1917. 

FITE,  WARNER.        Individualism. 

FRIEDLANDER,  ISRAEL.        Past  and  Present,  a  Collection  of  Jewish  Essays. 

ZHITLOWSKI,  CHAYYIM.        Gesammelte  Schriften. 

GIDDINGS,  FRANKLIN  H.        Democracy  and  Empire. 

GOTTHEIL,  RICHARD.        Zionism. 

GRANT,  MADISON.         The  Passing  of  the  Great  Race. 

HERZL,  THEODORE.         The  Jewish  State. 

HESS,  MOSES.        Rome  and  Jerusalem. 

HOBHOUSE,  L.  T.        Liberalism.     Social  Evolution  and  Political  Theory. 

HOLLAND,  REV.  R.  I.        The  Parent  First. 

HILL,  DAVID  JATNE.        Americanism,  What  is  It? 

225 


121E50 

226  THEORIES   OF   AMERICANIZATION 

HuBwrrz,  S.  T.  H.        "The  Jewish  Parochial  School,"  The  Jewish  Teacher,  Dec,  1917. 

Jewish  Encyclopedia.        Article,  "United  States," 

JAMES,  WILLIAM.        Pragmatism. 

KALLEN,  HORACE  M.        Constitutional  Foundations  of  the  New  Zion. 

.        "Democracy  versus  the  Melting  Pot,"  The  Nation,  May,  1915. 

KELLOR,  FRANCIS.        Straight  America. 

LOWIE,  ROBERT  H.        Culture  and  Ethnology. 

MAC!VER,  R.  M.        Community. 

MACVANNEL,  JOHN  A.        Outlines  of  the  Philosophy  of  Education. 

MUNSTERBERG,  HUGO.        Eternal  Values. 

McDEVirr,  MONSIGNOB  P.  R.        "The  State  and  Education,"  Bulletin  of  the  Catholic 

Education  Association,  February,  1916. 
PINSKER,  LEO.        Auto-Emancipation. 
RAVAGE,  WALTER  E.        An  American  in  the  Making. 
RELIGIOUS  EDUCATION.        Articles  in  February,  1916,  number. 
RILET,  A.         The  Religious  Question  in  Public  Education. 
Ross,  EDWARD  A.         The  Old  W&M  in  the  New. 
ROTCE,  JOSIAH.         The  Sources  ofReligious  Insight. 
RUPPIN,  ARTHUR.         The  Jews  of  To-day. 
SADLER,  M.  E.        Moral  Instruction  and  Training  in  Schools. 
SAMPTER,  JESSIE  E.        A  Guide  to  the  Study  of  Zionism. 
SANTAYANA,  GEORGE.        The  Life  of  Reason. 
SCHECHTER,  SOLOMON.        Aspects  of  Rabbinic  Theology. 
SPILLER,  GUSTAV.        Moral  Education  in  Eighteen  Countries. 

.         The  Interracial  Congress. 

.         "Science  and  Race  Prejudice,"  Sociological  Renew,  October,  1912. 

SHIELDS,  T.  E.        "Relation  between  Catholic  School  Systems  and  the  State," 

Catholic  Education  Bulletin,  November  16. 
THORNDIKE,  EDWARD  L.        Educational  Psychology. 
TRIGGS,  OSCAR  L.         Browning  and  Whitman,  a  Study  in  Democracy. 
WELLHAUSEN,  J.         The  History  of  Judah  and  Israel. 
WENNER,  GEORGE  V.        Religious  Education  and  Public  School.     "Lutheran  Paro- 

.        chial  School,"  Religious  Education,  April,  1916. 

WETL,  WALTER.        The  New  Democracy. 

WHITMAN,  WALT.        Democratic  Vistas. 

WIERNICK,  PETER.         The  Jews  in  America. 

WINCHESTER,  B.  S.         Religious  Education  and  Democracy. 

WOOD,  C.  A.        School  and  College  Credit  for  Outside  Bible  Class. 

WOODRUFF,  CHARLES  E.         The  Expansion  of  Races. 

ZANGWILL,  ISRAEL.        The  Melting  Pot. 

ZIMMERN,  ALFRED.     Nationality  and  Government. 

.         The  War  and  Democracy. 


University  of  California 

SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

405  Hilgard  Avenue,  Los  Angeles,  CA  90024-1388 

Return  this  material  to  the  library 

from  which  it  was  borrowed. 


.   LD-uKL 


«« 


2-WEERS 
URL-ID 


;(«4 

N21 


19'95REC'DC.I1 
Ui  0»  1997 


RPR  0  <3 


A     000920636 


